I recently obtained a copy of the Samson Francois recording of Chopin's
two piano concertos issued as an EMI Great Recording of the Century.  The
Francois recording has been somewhat controversial with some considering it
an absolutely revelatory performance while others think of it as a perverse
reading which destroys the poetry of Chopin's conception.

Chopin's piano concertos are among the most performed and recorded piano
concertos in the classical repertoire.  He wrote both of them at a young
age, and his orchestrations, although rather simple, blend beautifully
with the piano and can add much drama and strength to the works.  Chopin's
so-called first concerto in E minor Op.  11 was actually composed soon
after the F minor Op.  21 which was written in the year 1829 when Chopin
graduated from the Elsner Conservatory.

The recordings in my survey are:

#1 & 2 - Ohlsson/Kord/Warsaw Philharmonic - Arabesque Z6702(1998).
#1 & 2 - Argerich/Dutiot/Montreal - EMI 56798(1999).
#1 & 2 - Zimerman II/Polish Festival - DG 459684(1999).
#1     - Pires/Krivine/Chamber Orch. of Europe - DG 457585(1998).
#2     - Pires/Previn/Royal Philharmonic - DG 437817(1994).
#1     - Ax/Mackerras/Age of Enlightenment - Sony 60771(1998).
#2     - Ax/Mackerras/Age of Enlightenment - Sony 63371(1997).
#1 & 2 - Arrau/Inbal/London Philharmonic - Philips 438338(1970).
#1     - Perahia/Mehta/NY Philharmonic - Sony 42400(1980).
#1 & 2 - Francois/Fremaux/Monte Carlo - EMI 67261(1965).
#1 & 2 - Zimerman I/Giulini/LA Philharmonic - DG 415970(1979/80).
#1 & 2 - Rubinstein/Skrowaczewski(1), Wallenstein(2) - RCA 5612(1961/58).
#1 & 2 - Bachauer/Dorati/London Symphony - Mercury 434374(1963/64).
#1     - Pollini/Kletzki/Philharmonia Orchestra - EMI 66221(1960).

For this survey, I'm breaking with my custom of listening exclusively
on headphones and switching to my great B & W speakers.  There's a lot
of powerful music in these concertos, so I'm going with my most powerful
equipment.  Also, I won't be referring again to the concertos by number,
just F minor and E minor, and I'll start with the F minor concerto.

F minor Concerto First Movement(Maestoso) - This first movement is superb
music-making.  It has power, drive, momentum, tenderness, lyricism, and
poetry to die for.  The orchestral contributions tend to be subservient to
the solo instrument, but there are certainly passages where the orchestra's
weight and drive are crucial.  Concerning the orchestral contributions, I
find them important and highly enjoyable except for the orchestral coda
which is rather lame and uneventful.

Ohlsson's first movement is a joy to listen to.  His is a very beautiful
reading of great poetry, clocking in at 14'30".  The pacing is excellent
and the orchestra well supports Ohlsson.  I find this a highly mainstream
reading with superb piano sound.  It is a little lacking in drama and
power, both pianist and orchestra.

Argerich, although a minute faster than Ohlsson, seems like a longer
performance.  That's because Argerich is too soft-focused at times, and
this inclination makes the reading drag.  There are even moments when
the piano sound tends to dissolve.  Also, there's a "glassy" element
to the high piano notes.  These problems wouldn't seem very significant
if Argerich gave a special performance, but she gives an ordinary one.
Unfortunately, Argerich's first movement does not meet any high standards.

Zimerman II is outstanding; his reading takes 15'33" and it's packed with
superb orchestral drive/power and sensational piano playing from Zimerman.
He has all the power lacking in Ohlsson's reading and superb poetry and
tenderness as well.  Just check out the thrilling solo piano passage
starting at 4'34" - it's revelatory and a good example of what Zimerman
brings to this movement.  The only reservation I have is that Zimerman
momentarily softens the orchestra at 41" and 51" into the movement.  That's
a bad time for such a decision as it robs the opening of some of its
momentum.  Otherwise, I consider this performance a piece of perfection.

Zimerman I has much to offer also at a relatively fast speed (14'5").
This is an urgent performance with Giulini delivering outstanding direction.
Zimerman is not quite as poetic as in his subsequent effort, but he's very
good.  What tips the scales in favor of Zimerman II is its better overall
sound; also, the piano sound in the earlier recording, as was typical of
the period, has a slight "ping" which does detract from the total
experience.

The Bachauer version substitutes a "glassy" sound for the ping and has
considerable hiss.  Bachauer is not particularly lyrical or tender; nor is
she very exciting.  The saving grace of this performance is Dorati whose
direction is powerful and magnetic; pace is moderate at 14'33".  Although
not on a high level, Bachauer's version does surpass the Argerich; every
note comes through clearly.

The Rubinstein version has a slight hiss and the orchestral sound is a
little boxy, but those are minor sound blemishes with Wallenstein and
Rubinstein at the helm.  The performance is a fast one at 13'15", but
Wallenstein provides outstanding weight, poetry, drama, and pacing while
the Symphony of the Air glides magnificently through the music.  Rubinstein
is the master of Chopin's lyricism and tenderness; it is a privilege to
listen to him as he digs into the very soul of the kinder and gentler side
of Chopin.  But, I can't say that Rubinstein is special when power and
excitement are required.  Overall, this version is on the level of Ohlsson
and Zimerman I.

Arrau is the flip-side of Rubinstein in that he is thrilling in the
more dramatic and urgent music but not quite tender enough in the softer
passages.  Inbal and the London Philharmonic provide excellent support.
Speed is moderate, and sound quality is superb for 1970 and current time
as well.  This is a very exciting interpretation as good as Zimerman I.

Pires and Previn are a class act throughout the movement.  Both Pires
and Ohlsson are great mainstream versions - average speeds, great sound,
highly poetic, and providing a sufficient level of excitement.  I was very
impressed with Previn's urgency and violins.  Pires, however, does not
scale the heights as profoundly as Zimerman II, Rubinstein, or Arrau.

Ax and Mackerras deliver a very special performance.  Theirs is the only
surveyed version on period instruments, and it makes a big difference
(not totally favorable).  The orchestra sounds fantastic; detail among
the instruments is heightened, and Mackerras gets every last ounce of
drama out of the music.  The orchestral contributions exceed those of
any other version, and Ax with his 1851 London Erard is so heart-felt and
beautiful in the slower/softer passages.  However, be it Ax himself or his
instrument, there is some lack of power and resonance in his performance.
On balance, this is a version of the first movement to treasure as much as
Zimerman II.

At a similarly high level is the Francois reading.  There isn't much point
in reporting whether he's poetic or exciting.  The primary factors are how
individual, dynamic, and flowing his intepretation is.  His is certainly
the most interesting performance, and he never makes a bad decision.  For
what it's worth, his poetry matches that of Ax and Rubinstein.  Fremaux is
also excellent, and the orchestra sounds superb.  In fact, the recorded
sound is fantastic for 1967.

Excepting for Bachauer and Argerich, every version is either highly
rewarding or exceptional (Francois, Ax, Zimerman II).  Bachauer is slightly
better than Argerich, and that's the doing of Dorati.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]