Once apon a time, Jon Lewis asked about Michelangeli's Debussy:

>I have a free CD credit at the moment and am inches away from ordering the
>Images I/II/Children's Corner disc with it.

If you haven't already bought that disc, get the DG Centenery Collection
CD which is in excellent remastering, lower mid-price and has the works
you mention as well as 7 of the Preludes Book I.

>As for the Preludes, I'm a little concerned that by the time he recorded
>them in the 80's his technique might not have been up to it.  Is that so
>at all?

The preludes appear to have been recorded in the late '70s.  The technique
is pristine - the tonal and rhythmic control is near-absolute.

>Also I've read that the more mercurial pieces are kind of lugubrious in
>these late recordings.  I have no problem at all with a player "going his
>own way" with Debussy's music, but solemn all the way through would be too
>much.

It's true that these aren't spontaneous readings - every note has been
thought through and carefully placed.  But solemn or lugubrious are the
wrong words - the sound is bright and crystalline, and pieces like Poissons
d'or or Ce qu'a vu le vent d'ouest have plenty of impetus and character.
Furthermore, as I've said earlier, all these interpretations are notable
for their harmonic intensity - all the parts hold together, it's not an
impressionist 'soup'.  That more than makes up for the lack of Gieseking's
extra dynamism, in my view.

>Concerns of pedalling and such aside, does he bring out sufficiently the
>collage-like juxtapositions within the pieces? (That is, in the Preludes--
>the Images are more homogenous pieces generally.)

I'd say so.  The tonal layering and perspective in Voiles or Des pas sur la
neige is superb (as it is in the images, Reflets dans l'eau and Cloches a
travers les feuilles in particular).

For me, compared to Gieseking, Michelangeli was an acquired taste, but
believe me, if you haven't heard him yet, you're definitely missing
something!

Felix Delbruck
[log in to unmask]