Mahler: Symphony No.
2—arrangement for piano four hands by Bruno Walter. Maasa Nakazawa and
Suhrud Athavale, pianists. Naxos. $12.99.
Idil Biret Chamber Music Edition,
Volume 2: Brahms—Sonatas Nos. 1 and 2 for Cello and Piano. Roderic von
Bennigsen, cello; Idil Biret, piano. IBA. $9.99.
Idil Biret Solo Edition, Volume
9: Bach—Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue in D minor, BWV 903; Partita No. 1; French
Suite No. 5; English Suite No. 3. Idil Biret, piano. IBA. $9.99.
Bach: Organ Music—Prelude and
“St. Anne’s” Fugue, BWV 552; Toccata and Fugue in F, BWV 540; An Wasserflüssen
Babylon, BWV 653; Prelude and Fugue in C Minor, BWV 546; Choral Prelude “O Mensch
Bewein dein Sünde Groß,” BWV 622; Fantasy and Fugue in G Minor, BWV 542; Prelude
and Fugue in E Minor (“Wedge”), BWV 548. Barbara Harbach, organ. MSR Classics. $12.95.
Schubert: Piano Sonatas Nos. 18, D. 894, and 20, D. 959. David Korevaar, piano. MSR Classics.
$12.95.
How far can you push the piano? If you are
Chopin, you can push it deeply into expressiveness; Liszt, deeply into drama;
if you are John Cage, you can push it into “prepared” territory, changing many
of the inherent qualities of its sound. But there are other ways to push the
piano into new regions, for example by turning it almost literally into the
“orchestra in miniature” that Liszt saw it as being – by taking grand symphonic
works and creating versions of them for piano alone. This is scarcely a new
idea: Liszt himself was expert at it, as he showed in his arrangements of the
Beethoven symphonies (and even he was not the first to undertake that
particular task: he was preceded by Friedrich Kalkbrenner). Every once in a
while, though, the sheer daring of a piano arrangement of something symphonic
becomes breathtaking; and so it is with Bruno Walter’s four-hand arrangement of
Mahler’s “Resurrection” symphony. Even Mahler fanatics have not heard this
before – the new Naxos recording is a world première – and even those who know
Walter’s emotive conducting of Mahler’s symphonies, which often deviated from
the scores so as to bring out the feelings that Walter (who studied and worked
with Mahler and was friends with him) believed the composer intended to
emphasize, will have heard nothing like this. Variable in tempos and filled
with rubato Walter’s conducting may
have been, but when it comes to this handling of the Symphony No. 2, his
devotion to Mahler is absolute. This is an amazing feat, in one sense scaling
down the symphony but in another clarifying its structure and visualizing its
innards in much the way that X-rays illuminate bone. Walter is faithful to
Mahler’s scale, his tempos, his harmonies; but the inherent difference between
the sound of four hands on a piano (or, as in the present recording, two
separate pianos) and that of 100 musicians doubling parts and creating inner voices
and varieties of tension means that this arrangement sounds exactly like Mahler
and at the same time not at all like him. Mahler actually used the orchestra as
if it were a gigantic chamber group: instead of generally aiming for massed
sound in the Bruckner manner, he sought delicacy of color and care of aural
impressions by including a huge variety and number of instruments without
insisting that they play together all the time. The result is that when there is a full tutti, it is all the more overwhelming. That effect is inevitably
missing in Walter’s piano arrangement – but instead, listeners get to hear with
exceptional clarity the building blocks from which Mahler created this
monumental score, and to hear clearly how the pieces of the symphony connect to
and contrast with each other. The performance by Maasa Nakazawa and
Suhrud Athavale is more than serviceable, although it is not especially
Mahlerian – in the sense that one gets the feeling that these players would
have handled a Beethoven, Brahms or Bruckner arrangement in much the same way.
The notes are there, the tempos are followed and the harmonies are present, but
there is a certainly Mahlerian spirit missing – an absence that accentuates
that of the vocal forces in the fourth and fifth movements. Even Liszt had problems
with omitting the voices from the choral finale of Beethoven’s Ninth; Walter
encounters similar issues with Mahler’s Second. He solves them in a similar
way, by following the vocal lines in the piano and creating enough underlying
support to give these sections heft, if not verbiage. What is missing, though,
is grandeur, partly because of the inherent limitations of an arrangement like
this and partly because the pianists do not seem fully conversant with the
sheer scale of what Mahler did in this work. Nevertheless, this is a very
valuable recording and a must-have for Mahler lovers: it shows the inner
workings of the “Resurrection” symphony in ways that orchestral performances do
not, and indeed cannot. In so doing, it only increases one’s appreciation for
how magnificently Mahler handled this symphony’s musical material.
The first pianist to record
all the Liszt arrangements of Beethoven’s symphonies was Idil Biret, and that
is not the only way in which she pushed the boundaries of piano repertoire. Her
exceptionally strong and varied discography becomes increasingly impressive as
it grows and grows through new releases on the IBA (Idil Biret Archive) label. These
releases fall into separate series and, within the series, into re-releases of
older performances and new releases of ones recorded recently. The two latest
IBA recordings, in the Chamber Music
Edition and Solo Edition sequences,
are both new, the former from 2014 and the latter from 2015. Both show that
Biret, who is now 74, has lost none of her pianistic skill and none of the
thoughtful, analytical approach to music that, coupled with her sheer technical
ability, makes so many of her readings intellectually as well as sonically
thrilling. The Chamber Music Edition
recording of the two Brahms cello sonatas is especially good. The reason is
that Biret here has a partner (with whom she first worked as far back as 1970)
who matches her musical intellect and shares with her the same sense of Brahms’
scale and of the relationship the composer created between the cello and piano
in these sonatas. One would normally expect the string instrument to take the
lead much of the time in music of this sort, but Brahms’ own pianistic
predilections mean that the piano is the primary focus in these works more
often than not. Yet in the hands of Biret and Roderic von Bennigsen, what
emerges is not a contest for supremacy but a finely honed level of cooperation,
a true partnership that lends the music considerable stature and emotional
depth. These two sonatas are quite different. The first, Op. 38 in E minor, is
a deeply somber three-movement work with the pervasive “autumnal” quality so
often associated with Brahms. It also has some strong ties to Bach – just as
the Fourth Symphony, also in E minor, was later to have – and possesses in its
finale the same surprising combination of traditional formality with distinctly
Romantic emotional sensibility. Von Bennigsen and Biret have clearly thought
through all the elements of the work, and they deliver a fully convincing
reading as a result. Then they switch gears for the Op. 99 sonata, which is in
F and in four movements and is more outgoing and lyrical. It sounds almost as
if this is the earlier, more-youthful work and the first sonata is the later,
more-serious one. One of the difficulties with the second sonata is that the
first three movements are very well-constructed and effective, but the
concluding Allegro molto is a
less-substantial piece, a Rondo that does not quite measure up to what has come
before. The skill of these performers is such that this movement makes full
emotional sense in their reading – it never quite becomes a capstone for the
work, but it seems to follow more logically and with a greater sense of
rightness than it usually does. These sonatas show off Biret’s skill in chamber
music to a very fine degree, and show how fortunate she is to have a partner
such as von Bennigsen in music that requires such close collaborative effort.
The Bach disc in the Solo Edition is not quite at this level.
It certainly shows Biret’s elegantly stylish way with Bach, and demonstrates
for the umpteenth time that this pianist has the intellectual as well as technical
heft to make Bach’s solo music effective. But no pianist, Biret included, can
ever escape the reality that Bach did not write for the piano, and there is no
really good solution to playing him on this instrument. Making the piano sound
sere and spare only calls attention to the fact that it is not a harpsichord or
clavichord. Allowing it to flourish with the sound of which it is capable
produces performances that are out of keeping with the scale and intent of the
music. Biret, not surprisingly, stakes out a middle ground. She does not
overwhelm listeners with grand Romantic-era gestures and constant rubato, nor does she hold back the
piano’s sound to such a degree that it becomes constricted and constrained.
Instead, Biret delves into both the formal elegance and the emotional content
of Bach’s music, allowing it to flow naturally while effectively showcasing the
rhythmic differences among the dance forms in the Partita No. 1, French Suite No. 5, and English Suite No. 3. Biret’s formal skill comes through most
clearly in the Chromatic Fantasia and
Fugue in D minor, BWV 903, where her pacing and handling of the fugal
voices are well-balanced and as contrapuntally convincing as they can be on an
instrument not constructed for counterpoint. Not even Biret can make Bach sound
totally appropriate on the piano, but what she can do – and what she does do –
is to make his music appealing in a different way from that of the instruments
for which he intended it.
Still, the contrast between
Biret’s piano-Bach and Barbara Harbach’s organ-Bach shows the inherent
superiority of performing this music on the right type of instrument. Much like
Biret, Harbach is a thoughtful performer as well as an energetic one, and she
too gives the impression that she has thought through all the elements of every
work she plays long before she sits down for a performance. The two organs that
Harbach plays on a new MSR Classics CD are scarcely comparable to those of
Bach’s time: one, in Rochester, New York, dates to 1983, while the other, in
Lyons, New York, dates to 1970. But Harbach evokes the Baroque feeling of this
music through her skillful choice of stops, her adept blending of voices, and
her very clear understanding of Bach’s style and the extent to which an
interpreter must – and must not – vary from the printed notes. The program
given by Harbach is clearly a highly personal one – there is little inherent
connection among the works – but these pieces, one and all, give Harbach a
chance to show the great variety of sounds and styles that Bach brought to his
compositions and that the organ can put on display. The gradual addition of
voices to An Wasserflüssen
Babylon, BWV 653, for example,
contrasts strongly and appealingly with the striking immediacy of the opening
of the Prelude and Fugue in C Minor, BWV
546, which immediately follows on the disc. The stepwise, highly chromatic
opening of the Fantasy and Fugue in G
Minor, BWV 542 (usually called “Fantasia” rather than “Fantasy”) makes a
wonderful contrast with the much more declamatory start of the next work, Prelude and Fugue in E Minor (“Wedge”), BWV
548. Harbach handles all the fugues with care, precision and enough feeling
to make them sound like something well beyond dry exercises. Indeed, the
contrast between her improvisation-like approach to the first of the paired
movements (whether Prelude, Toccata or Fantasy) and her much more even,
almost-staid handling of the fugues is one of this disc’s particular pleasures.
Harbach, herself a composer, quite clearly understands the structural elements
of this music, and her sensitive readings show that she knows just when to draw
attention to the works’ foundations and when to let listeners hear just how
imposing an edifice Bach built upon those bases.
The piano is much better suited to the
music of Schubert than to that of Bach, not only because Schubert deliberately
wrote for it but also because Schubert’s melodic flow and his quicksilver key
switching seem ideal for an instrument that is essentially harmonic in nature
rather than contrapuntal. David Korevaar offers sensitive, nuanced
interpretations of two late Schubert piano sonatas, Nos. 18 and 20 (the latter
the composer’s penultimate one), on a fine new MSR Classics recording. No. 18
in G, D. 894, was the last sonata published during Schubert’s lifetime, and was
given the title “Fantasie” by the publisher because of the freewheeling nature
of the first movement. Quite unlike a Bach Fantasia, this movement one by
Schubert is songlike from the start and features a lyrical, lilting second
subject – and in fact the movement is in sonata form, although it tends to push
the form’s boundaries. One thing Korevaar does particularly well is to hold the
movement in formal check while still allowing its emotional overflow to pour
forth. The contrasts of the second movement, between gentleness and drama, also
come across well here, but what is most impressive by the end of the sonata is
the feeling of serenity that Korevaar communicates. There is a sense in which
all the contrasts of the music are designed to be merely brief excursions from
quietude. Sonata No. 20 in A, D. 959, is a different matter altogether. Here
Korevaar begins effectively with the opening drama, then lets the work slide
into gentler, more-lyrical territory with apparent ease. There is serenity in
this sonata too, notably at the end of the first movement, but by and large, there
are more highs and lows than in D894. This later work has lamentation in its
not-very-slow second movement (an Andantino),
considerable good spirits in its third, and pervasive lyricism in its
concluding Rondo. Korevaar picks up on all these emotions and lets them flow
naturally and pleasantly – indeed, a good adjective for the sonata as a whole
is “pleasant.” The sound of Korevaar’s piano – not the usual Steinway but a
Shigeru Kawai SK-7 – is interesting, with considerable liveliness but without
the rich resonance in the bass that one expects from Steinway. Korevaar plays
with feeling and adeptness, but the actual piano sound may not be to all
listeners’ liking. The quality of Korevaar’s performances, however, should be.
No comments:
Post a Comment