Despite i think Gould was one of greatest Bach's interpreters(with
the exception of WTC),i always found "extravagance" in works like
Appassionatta,or the Bhrams Piano concerto in Dminor.Sometimes his
"extremes" even if he pretend to put in evidence things wich many
pianists take few care of them, Thanks Gould for the good intention, but
unfortunately the results "sound" just horrible.  Anyway the great "Gould"
brain tried to do this kind of things with works who deserved and wich
allow to do it for it inner estructure,conception,etc.Here is maybe the
reason wich justified plenty the Gould's aproach,despite the ears pain.
Speaking about Lupu's playing of the works which are mentioned in Allan's
Mail,i really didn't heard that CD,but i will try to find it.The few
times i listen to Radu Lupu,in live performance,i really enjoy a lot his
conceptions of (especially) slow "tempi".  I remembered the Introduction
of the Beethoven's Choral Fantasy.It was Very slow,but at the same time
"very" wonderful, what a control of dynamics,phrasing,etc..and specially
the "atmosphere" he created.  I always think(specially in this times of
"play fast or die") the supreme art comes when you can control succesfully
"slow " movement playing it "slow".  On the other hand is the "school" who
justifye play Adagio like Allegretto,with the excuse of making that music,
"lighter".Well i don't believe in that.  Another extreme are at example the
Tchaikowsky Piano oncerto No1 in Arrau's version,but here is a different
story,because (under my point of view)Arrau's pedantic conception of a work
(even being a wonderful work),who is beautiful, but wich intellectualy in
the inner musical aspect,has not any important thing to put out,sounds just
distorsioned playing in that way.

Regards.  Gerardo Constantini:.