As much as I admire Arrau's two Diabelli recordings, they never quite enjoyed comparable critical and public consensus to the extent of Rudolf Serkin's mono version or the first Stephen Kovacevich recording (the one on Philips). So far as I know, Arrau didn't play them in public from the mid-70s on, whereas Serkin retained them in his repertoire at least until 1985 (I heard Serkin play them twice, once at Carnegie Hall in 1984, and at the Salle Pleyel in Paris in 1985). Unfortunately the not-well-distributed and hard-to-find 1970s Charles Rosen Diabellis never got the attention nor the traction it deserved, because it happens to be my personal reference version!
I wasn't even aware Arrau's (as much as I admire him and his late Beethoven in particular) was considered a reference, at least not in Europe, where the ones mentioned most often are by Brendel (in particular the 1976 BCC live performance, despite it's spotty availability in the digital era), along with the aforementioned Serkin and Bishop-Kovacevich.
Agreed! I felt as though I understood these variations much more than any other pianist when I heard Rosen‘s version. His interpretations of various pieces of music varied quite a bit, and I heard him play live with two very different levels of quality many years ago. In any case, I think he plays these variations with great insight, and I am glad to hear that somebody else found them equally enjoyable!
@@johntramsay It's partly a musical joke on a waltz theme Beethoven thought ridiculous and on which he initially refused to write "his" variation (whereas around 50 other composers were happy to accept the offer), so unless the humor comes out (Gulda 1970, Brendel BBC 1976, Kinderman 1994), it does seem as if the interpreter were missing the point, although a slightly aloof but cogent reading like Bishop-Kovacevich's, or an insightfully cogent one like Rosen's, or ones that go for beauty of tone such as Arrau and Alfredo Perl (particularly the slow variations are truly cantabile) all work splendidly.
Arrau's mono version of the Diabelli is the one packaged with his Philips Beethoven sonatas box set and I think it really is outstanding too. Well worth a concentrated listening.
For me, Serkin will remain the "reference" - the standard to which other recordings are compared - for the cricket in Variation 31. When I sample other recordings, I always ask mayself "Does this version have a cricket of its own chirping merrily away?". I'm always sorely disappointed when I don't hear one.
Thank you very much for this, Dave. I am not nearly as knowledgeable about classical music as many of your listeners clearly are, but I have been listening for many years and have tried to explore as much as I can. I had never even heard of the Diabelli Variations. I just listened to the Arrau recording. It's beautiful.
Stephen Bishop is a name of a singer/songwriter popular in the seventies and eighties. That always struck me as a component to Kovacevich's name confusion,
I adore the Anderszewski recording - which is very odd sometimes but also is hilariously funny. I was lucky enough to see Andras Schiff do it live in Berkeley in 2012 and his performance was wonderful, far better than his recorded ones. I love the Arrau recordings of Beethoven passim. Among modern pianists I love the Levit recording.
I was obsessed with the Diabellis a few years ago and listened to a dozen plus recordings. As much as I love Arrau in Beethoven's piano sonatas I wasn't as taken with his Diabellis. He's definitely excellent in the heavier and more ethereal variations, but Arrau wasn't the lightest or most humorful player, and I think humor is perhaps the defining characteristic of the Diabellis in contrast to most other Beethoven. I do prefer both Kovacevich recordings. Anderszewski, Levit, and Staier are also quite good.
I think the reason the Diabelli Variations never achieved the broad public acceptance of the Goldbergs has to do with the spirit of the pieces. The Goldberg theme is introspective and contemplative. No matter how much some individual variations may explore very different moods, that inner seriousness colors the work as a whole. The Diabelli theme is a light and playful waltz, which colors our overall impression of the piece very differently despite the introspective character of some of its variations. After I wrote the above, I watched Alfred Brendel's performance of the Diabellis on RUclips, and the depth of emotion that shows on his face made me realize that I had overstated the contrast between the Beethoven and Bach variations
As referred to by others, the cricket that sang along with Serkin during his recording made.... quite a splash. It helped me realize that behind every endeavor, there are fallible humans and life lurking. I would have chosen Jiminy Cricket for the task but will settle for the Marlborough one.
Serkin did return to the Diabellis, but not in the recording studio. RUclips provides at least a couple of more recent live performances. Let me also again extol the greatness of Artur Schnabel and his Diabelli--one of the very greatest indeed--perhaps the quasi-reference before Serkin-Kovacevich-Arrau triumvirate (PS Yours truly also has a recording of it on the Azica label which I hope Dave might check out at some point)
I got to know the Diabelii Variations through Stephen Kovacevich's Phillips' recording (as I did through his Bartok's Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion with Argerich - but that's another story!). I've collected a surprising amount of Diabelii's, some more obscure than others (Perl on Arte Nova, Frith on ASV) because I've always warmed to the quirkiness of the piece, and felt it can stand a range of interpretation. Strangely never got around to Arrau, do perhaps need to remedy that. When will we get the reference of L' Heure espagnole & L'Enfant et les sortileges (because they are such delicious pieces)? I'm thinking Maazel RTF DG? Oh, and perhaps the reference for Prokofiev's amazing 3rd Symphony - Muti Philadephia? I'll stop now😂
I'd give Schnable an honorary mention whose 1937 version is still the benchmark for many. Personally, I've always gone back to Brendel especially his live Decca recording which captures the sheer might and quirkiness of this piece. 11:32
As reference recordings go, Buchbinder's deserves a mention for his complete recording of the Diabelli project for Teldec on two CDs. The Beethoven set was published separately, and is pretty darn good, but sady never got the circulation required to be a serious contender as a reference for just those.
I love this piece, and have listened to it on the radio without paying attention to the name of the pianist! I have Solchany's recording, which I enjoy and so never looked further. It is splendid performance, and well recorded [by EMI], but I would not say that it must be a reference! I have never listened to Arraw, or even Serkin. I would have to have paid more attention to guarantee that statement, of course. I am not really tempted to get another recording ... But your vids are always interesting, and I am grateful. Best wishes from George
What about a Reference Recording talk about Rzewski's The People United, now that it has been recorded much more often? Rzewski vs Oppens vs Hamelin vs Levit. Discuss!
Arrau is possibly going to be replaced as the reference recording (Levitt?) someday but his recording will always be-deservedly so!-be heard and loved.
Видеоклипы
As much as I admire Arrau's two Diabelli recordings, they never quite enjoyed comparable critical and public consensus to the extent of Rudolf Serkin's mono version or the first Stephen Kovacevich recording (the one on Philips). So far as I know, Arrau didn't play them in public from the mid-70s on, whereas Serkin retained them in his repertoire at least until 1985 (I heard Serkin play them twice, once at Carnegie Hall in 1984, and at the Salle Pleyel in Paris in 1985). Unfortunately the not-well-distributed and hard-to-find 1970s Charles Rosen Diabellis never got the attention nor the traction it deserved, because it happens to be my personal reference version!
I wasn't even aware Arrau's (as much as I admire him and his late Beethoven in particular) was considered a reference, at least not in Europe, where the ones mentioned most often are by Brendel (in particular the 1976 BCC live performance, despite it's spotty availability in the digital era), along with the aforementioned Serkin and Bishop-Kovacevich.
Rosen. I'll be looking for that one.
Agreed! I felt as though I understood these variations much more than any other pianist when I heard Rosen‘s version. His interpretations of various pieces of music varied quite a bit, and I heard him play live with two very different levels of quality many years ago. In any case, I think he plays these variations with great insight, and I am glad to hear that somebody else found them equally enjoyable!
@@johntramsay It's partly a musical joke on a waltz theme Beethoven thought ridiculous and on which he initially refused to write "his" variation (whereas around 50 other composers were happy to accept the offer), so unless the humor comes out (Gulda 1970, Brendel BBC 1976, Kinderman 1994), it does seem as if the interpreter were missing the point, although a slightly aloof but cogent reading like Bishop-Kovacevich's, or an insightfully cogent one like Rosen's, or ones that go for beauty of tone such as Arrau and Alfredo Perl (particularly the slow variations are truly cantabile) all work splendidly.
I love Rosen's performance as well
Arrau's mono version of the Diabelli is the one packaged with his Philips Beethoven sonatas box set and I think it really is outstanding too. Well worth a concentrated listening.
For me, Serkin will remain the "reference" - the standard to which other recordings are compared - for the cricket in Variation 31. When I sample other recordings, I always ask mayself "Does this version have a cricket of its own chirping merrily away?". I'm always sorely disappointed when I don't hear one.
Thank you very much for this, Dave. I am not nearly as knowledgeable about classical music as many of your listeners clearly are, but I have been listening for many years and have tried to explore as much as I can. I had never even heard of the Diabelli Variations. I just listened to the Arrau recording. It's beautiful.
Stephen Bishop is a name of a singer/songwriter popular in the seventies and eighties. That always struck me as a component to Kovacevich's name confusion,
I adore the Anderszewski recording - which is very odd sometimes but also is hilariously funny. I was lucky enough to see Andras Schiff do it live in Berkeley in 2012 and his performance was wonderful, far better than his recorded ones. I love the Arrau recordings of Beethoven passim. Among modern pianists I love the Levit recording.
Agreed (Anderszewski)!
I was obsessed with the Diabellis a few years ago and listened to a dozen plus recordings. As much as I love Arrau in Beethoven's piano sonatas I wasn't as taken with his Diabellis. He's definitely excellent in the heavier and more ethereal variations, but Arrau wasn't the lightest or most humorful player, and I think humor is perhaps the defining characteristic of the Diabellis in contrast to most other Beethoven. I do prefer both Kovacevich recordings. Anderszewski, Levit, and Staier are also quite good.
I think the reason the Diabelli Variations never achieved the broad public acceptance of the Goldbergs has to do with the spirit of the pieces. The Goldberg theme is introspective and contemplative. No matter how much some individual variations may explore very different moods, that inner seriousness colors the work as a whole. The Diabelli theme is a light and playful waltz, which colors our overall impression of the piece very differently despite the introspective character of some of its variations.
After I wrote the above, I watched Alfred Brendel's performance of the Diabellis on RUclips, and the depth of emotion that shows on his face made me realize that I had overstated the contrast between the Beethoven and Bach variations
As referred to by others, the cricket that sang along with Serkin during his recording made.... quite a splash. It helped me realize that behind every endeavor, there are fallible humans and life lurking. I would have chosen Jiminy Cricket for the task but will settle for the Marlborough one.
Serkin did return to the Diabellis, but not in the recording studio. RUclips provides at least a couple of more recent live performances. Let me also again extol the greatness of Artur Schnabel and his Diabelli--one of the very greatest indeed--perhaps the quasi-reference before Serkin-Kovacevich-Arrau triumvirate (PS Yours truly also has a recording of it on the Azica label which I hope Dave might check out at some point)
I got to know the Diabelii Variations through Stephen Kovacevich's Phillips' recording (as I did through his Bartok's Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion with Argerich - but that's another story!). I've collected a surprising amount of Diabelii's, some more obscure than others (Perl on Arte Nova, Frith on ASV) because I've always warmed to the quirkiness of the piece, and felt it can stand a range of interpretation. Strangely never got around to Arrau, do perhaps need to remedy that.
When will we get the reference of L' Heure espagnole & L'Enfant et les sortileges (because they are such delicious pieces)? I'm thinking Maazel RTF DG? Oh, and perhaps the reference for Prokofiev's amazing 3rd Symphony - Muti Philadephia? I'll stop now😂
I'd give Schnable an honorary mention whose 1937 version is still the benchmark for many.
Personally, I've always gone back to Brendel especially his live Decca recording which captures the sheer might and quirkiness of this piece. 11:32
As reference recordings go, Buchbinder's deserves a mention for his complete recording of the Diabelli project for Teldec on two CDs. The Beethoven set was published separately, and is pretty darn good, but sady never got the circulation required to be a serious contender as a reference for just those.
Tack!
Thank you very much!
Oh, we're on a pianistic role. I've got your next reference. Not variations, but still there's a definite reference: Albeniz's Iberia.
I love this piece, and have listened to it on the radio without paying attention to the name of the pianist!
I have Solchany's recording, which I enjoy and so never looked further. It is splendid performance, and well recorded [by EMI], but I would not say that it must be a reference!
I have never listened to Arraw, or even Serkin. I would have to have paid more attention to guarantee that statement, of course.
I am not really tempted to get another recording ...
But your vids are always interesting, and I am grateful.
Best wishes from George
Yes....an award should've gone to Brendel...who recorded it a minimum of 3 times. More than anyone else, I'm sure!
What about a Reference Recording talk about Rzewski's The People United, now that it has been recorded much more often?
Rzewski vs Oppens vs Hamelin vs Levit. Discuss!
No. There is no consensus.
It gets recorded every couple of years and performed live by few known artists
An Ives Concord reference talk would be interesting, though I think the outcome is predictable.
Arrau is possibly going to be replaced as the reference recording (Levitt?) someday but his recording will always be-deservedly so!-be heard and loved.
I love the arrau. And Levitt. My lord how good is he with everything he touches?
This one I nailed. Arrau without doubt. Poor Brendel (Vox) was not mentioned...again.
Nope.
I grew up on that with my parent's scratchy vinyl, So much great music, they never upgraded to CD,
Apart from the fact that the Brendel recording that everyone's been extolling in Europe is the BBC live performance from 1976.
I can’t tell you how eagerly I look forward to these each day. So Dave, what about the Enigma Variations?
@@sleepjar7013 Adrian Boult?