In my case, I think I probably just need to listen to him more.
Hmm fav. Sofronitsky recordings:
Schumann Sym Etudes
Schumann Fantasie (for me this is unmatched, first movement, no one else has expressed that sense of intense in-the-moment love).
Chopin mazurkas & nocturnes
Scriabin op. 8/12 and most of the smaller pieces (op. 16) and late sonatas. Not Sonata 5 which is Richterās (Prague).
All these are live. His live recordings from the late '50s and 1960 are the ones to hear IMO. Denon. Havenāt been so affected by any of his studio recordings.
yeah those people arenāt interesting, and I think by making it impersonal like that they have abdicated responsibility and also misunderstand Sofronitskyās appeal. I love Sofronitsky because I read Akhmatova, Dostoevsky and Platonov, watched Tarkovsky and Shepitko, and lived my life. I think you understand him from getting out there and experiencing the emotions of life (and to some extent art, though they mix). You can feel all that in his playing ā itās very alive, way way beyond mere piano playing. The guy who played that Schumann Fantasie knew what it was to be in love, to have his palms sweat and hands shake in withdrawal and manically drive back towards the person he wanted. He evokes intensely vertical emotions. The live performances feel replete with spontaneous commitments and his best moments reach a sense of love-tragedy (which probably spoke to many people back then, especially women). If you love Shakespeareās senses of love and tragedy, I think heās your guy.
1 Like
Super-like Tony, thanks. Iāll revisit all these soon and will keep in mind what youāre saying.
1 Like
Anyone familiar with Nicolai Orloff? I see that Decca will re-publish his CD soon:
https://www.prestomusic.com/classical/products/8502903--nicolai-orloff-the-decca-recordings
1 Like
A nice Chopinist in the old tradition, one of the best pupils of Igumnov. Heard some of his playing on YT.
I donāt know his recordings but would like to hear them.
A lot of Cliburnās studio stuff is boring. He was a very different pianist live. He started to burn out around '68, but for that decade after the competition win, he could be explosive as well as pretty, but he just wasnāt interested in the former all that much. His live Rach 3 from the competition is worlds better than the sleepy official live recording that got released shortly after coming back to the USA. Same with the Appassionata, or the Liszt Sonata. The live recordings of those rank up there with the best ever, and in blind listening, you might think they were prime Richter.
3 Likes
From what I remember his tech was always pitiful (by todayās standards), in that it really sounded like he was always on the limit of what he was capable of playing.
I also donāt see him as a great technician, but at his best I also never think it was in the way. What I take with me from him is his large and unforced sound - he truly drew a golden tone from the instrument - which gave this voluminous, indeed luminous, quality to his playing in the years immediately after the Tchai. Itās in slower and lyrical passages I like him best, though his grand line kept together large scale works beautifully too. Always live, and almost always early.
Heās really one of the great chameleons in music incidentally. As far as I can tell, in everything essential, this is clearly a RUSSIAN pianist. They gave one back for Horowitz there.
1 Like
IMO, his is the most refined and satisfying Rachmaninoff 3rd. Both the Tchaik comp and Carnegie recs. I also like his Rach Sonata 2, Tchaikovsky Concerto 1, Brahms Concerto 2, Rach Concerto 2, Prok Concerto 3 / Sonata 6, Barber Sonata, Chopin Sonata 3, and a few others. I think anyone who says most of his recordings are overrated hasnāt actually listened to them.
Also his Rach 39/5 from Moscow is among the best ever recorded.
1 Like
Not been convinced by Rudolf Zerkinā¦
How do u mofoz rate him?
1 Like
Serkin is a top 20 mofo for sure. His 40s and 50s recs are especially awesome.
2 Likes
Highly - but not as highly as his reputation.
A friend Iāve lost touch with since many, many years now once said that Horowitz and Serkin were the only pianists during his youth (in the 70s) who could drive an audience in to a frenzy, only Horowitz through mostly romantic repertoire and Serkin through the classics. There is something to that, I remember several recordings Iāve heard with him in Mozart and Beethoven which have a great nerve and excitement about them.
2 Likes
I havenāt liztened to much but been undahwhelmd by wut I did hear, maybe juzt not my kind ov penizt
1 Like
Giving diz a lizten
1 Like
I should relisten to his chopin before saying that I donāt rate him. Going on 10-15 year old memories isnāt a good idea when youāve heard a lot since and your opinion might have changed.
God knows when Iāll find time for it, but if you like I can pull some things out. My experience is that heās best heard live, and best relatively early. 50s and 60s are great, but ~late 70s~ and practically all the 80s werenāt a whole lot of fun.
1 Like
Thatās not where you want to start. From memory thatās an early 80s studio recording, which is a sure way to find him at his worst.
1 Like
Tru a clazzic exampleā¦I had da zame experience wiz da KEMPFF and even to zum extent da RECTUM when I firzt heard hiz recz
Juz liztenin to mofoz in deir 70z n 80z iz bound to give a zheeyat firzt imprezzion 
1 Like
Yes Kempff is even āworseā in that aspect. I personally donāt care at all for his DG recordings, but there are some worthwhile things from the concert halls during the 60s/70s. The Kempff I like however is the one on 78-rpm - a completely different pianist.
2 Likes