It doesn't sound like a great recipe for success:  take what is
essentially a 'next to nothing' piece of music by Diabelli and subject it
to thirty-three variations.  However, Beethoven was just the man for the
assignment.  His variations encompass the entire spectrum of emotional
themes with a musical inspiration second to none.

Alfred Brendel refers to Beethoven's Diabelli Variations as "the greatest
of all piano works".  I imagine that many piano enthusiasts would take
exception to this tribute, but the work is one of my three favorite solo
piano works involving variations along with Bach's Goldberg Variations and
the Variations on a Theme by Handel from Brahms.

These are the versions for your consideration:

Piotr Anderszewski.....Virgin Classics 45468/2000/63:10
Daniel Barenboim.......Westminster 471203/1965/61:09
Alfred Brendel.........Philips 456730/1976/50:40
Theo Bruins............Canal Grande 9324/1989/49:42
Mieczyslaw Horszowski..Vox Box Legends 5511/1952/48:18
William Kinderman......Hyperion 66763/1994/55:04
Olli Mustonen..........RCA 61448/1996/46:33
Maurizio Pollini.......Deutsche Grammophon 459645/1998/50:08
Sviatoslav Richter.....Music & Arts 879/1970/47:45
Sviatoslav Richter.....Praga 354025/1986/50:23
Bernard Roberts........Nimbus 5193/1989/52:10
Artur Schnabel.........Philips 456961/1937/53:49
Peter Serkin...........Pro Arte 447/1989/58:00
Grigory Sokolov........Opus 111 42-9106/1985/60:06
Maria Yudina...........Philips 456994/1961/44:19

I do have a few general words about the Barenboim version.  Some folks
assume that this first of three recorded Barenboim versions is from his
teenage years, but that is not correct.  Barenboim was twenty-three when he
made his first recording.  This confusion likely stems from the coupling,
the "Moonlight Sonata", which was recorded by Barenboim when he was about
seventeen years old.  Although the "Moonlight" is in mono, Barenboim's
Diabelli Variations is in stereo.  He later recorded the work for Deutsche
Grammophon in the 1980's with a more recent version from Teldec in the
1990's.  Since I prefer the 1960's version for its greater youthfulness
and energy, this is the one I decided to include in the review project.

In determining how to review these recordings, I decided to go with
milestones which I find represent fairly natural blocks of music; they are
personal in nature and have no connections to the structural milestones
that are usually noted:

Theme and Variations 1-8
Variations 9-14
Variations 15-24
Variations 25-33

Theme and 1st variation - Diabelli's theme and the 1st variation are
demonstrative pieces, and the approaches that the artists use bring up one
of the basic differences among them.  Some keep the pressure on throughout
with little exception; others often use hesitations and alter dynamics,
touch, tempo, inflections, etc.  The first group prioritizes the inherent
strength and momentum of the music; the second delivers a healthy dose of
'nuance' and perhaps expansiveness.  This type of division keeps cropping
up whenever a powerful variation is played.

I find that both approaches can be very rewarding as long as the artistry
of the performer is at a high level.  However, I also assume that many
listeners would have a distinct preference one way or the other.  So I
will often be bringing up this aspect of the performances to clarify which
artists take which route.

Diabelli's theme does endure much criticism especially compared to what
Beethoven did with it.  Yet, it has great exuberance, strength, and a
bouncing rhythm.  Any version which captures those three elements is a
winner.  The 1st variation is highly ceremonial and can push its way into
an heroic environment.

I like to think of Diabelli's theme and the 1st variation as my
introduction to how each performer will handle the stronger and more
exuberant variations.  You couldn't ask for stronger and more demonstrative
readings than from Theo Bruins, Piotr Anderszewski, and Maria Yudina; their
power-based exuberance is infectious.

Daniel Barenboim's theme is energetic and stimulating.  In the 1st
variation, he shoots for both a high degree of momentum/exuberance and
nuance.  I think he is fully successful in presenting a superb balance
between the two features.  It makes for an interesting interpretation
which still is well within mainstream boundaries.

One of the most distinctive readings comes from Grigory Sokolov.  Although
his recording was made in 1985, the sound quality is among the best of the
fifteen versions for review.  The soundstage is deep, rich, and possesses
great clarity.  Sokolov makes every note and chord so distinct, and his
level of nuance is easily the most prevalent and effective of any version
I know.  In the 1st variation, Sokolov often pauses and slows down in
extreme fashion.  Yet, he makes me believe that the music is meant to be
played that way.  With Sokolov, the variation is its own world, and he
allows plenty of time to luxuriate in it.  He also insures that the
exuberance and strength of the music shines through.

For a performance of great structural integrity, Richter/70 can't be
equaled.  I just marvel at his command of architecture; it's as if he
personally built the music from scratch.  Like Barenboim, his 1st variation
beautifully balances strength and nuance.  I find Richter/86 a little
looser in structure than his earlier recording.

Ollie Mustonen is well known for performances which reside far afield
from the norm, and he's the most unusual in the Diabelli Variations as
well.  His 'lurch and stop' style in the theme and 1st variation reminds
me of the physical gyrations of David Byrne from the former rock group
"Talking Heads".  Mustonen constantly shortens note values and increases
the spacing; the result is a very stark and lean texture.  He also uses
staccato frequently and when you might least expect it.  The effectiveness
of his approach is up for grabs.  I can imagine all kinds of responses
from the listening audience.  Personally, I find Mustonen interesting and
provocative.  At the same time, I do miss the consistency of momentum
provided by the other versions and their fuller textures as well.

The remaining versions are all mighty fine with the exception of Peter
Serkin who conveys the least exuberance and gusto; he also does not rate
highly on the nuance scale.  Bernard Roberts impresses with his refined and
excellently paced performances; I like him much better in Beethoven than in
Bach or Debussy.

Overall, my favorite versions of the theme and 1st variation are
from Richter/70, Barenboim, and Sokolov; Serkin and Mustonen, although
enjoyable, hold up the rear.  With such strong competition, a very good
performance is well below the median.

2nd Variation - I consider this one of the most distinctive and enjoyable
variations in the set primarily because of the very interesting rhythmic
patterns created by a stretti-like effect.  We usually refer to stretti
as the over-lapping of voices, themes, or phrases.  In the 2nd variation,
Beethoven creates the illusion of a perpetual overlapping of notes.  In
actuality, Beethoven invests each note with a counter-balance.  I find
the mix of illusion and reality quite compelling as the performer has
the opportunity to come up with some irresistable rhythms.

There are also other great features of the 2nd variation.  A featherly and
pristine touch is needed from the pianist *combined* with an undercurrent
of tension/urgency which can spill into desperation.  These are not easy
qualities to convey simultaneously.

The versions from Grigory Sokolov and Piotr Anderszewski present
interesting similarities and contrasts.  Each gives a relatively subdued
performance; desperation hardly comes into either of the interpretations.
Given this situation, it's crucial that the interest provided by the
rhythmic patterns be quite high.  This is where I feel Sokolov falls short.
Although enjoyable, his patterns are mainstream.  Adding the lack of
tension in his reading, the performance is among the least compelling.

To say that Anderszewski overcomes some lack of drama in his reading is
putting it mildly.  I've not heard such enticing and arresting rhythmic
patterns out of this music before.  Kinderman isn't quite as arresting as
Anderszewski, but his patterns are appealing and his detail superb.

Bernard Roberts joins Sokolov on the lower rung with a performance which
has much slack with cute pauses which increase the slack.  I find Roberts
benign in the 2nd Variation.  Since Barenboim sounds like a lounge pianist,
he must be benign as well.

Serkin, Horszowski, and Pollini give excellent performances with fine
tension, touch, and rhythm.  Mustonen is very fast and exciting, but I
continue to be skeptical about his extremely lean textures.  For an equally
quick reading, Theo Bruins provides the fuller texture that many would
prefer.

You won't find slower versions than the ones from Artur Schnabel and
Alfred Brendel.  However, there's no slack or relaxing as they provide
excellent tension and drama throughout.  The two Richter versions are the
most dramatic of the group of fifteen; Richter/70 is a little faster but
both are similar in impact and approach.  Speaking of drama, Yudina doesn't
dramatize as much as bully her way through the music; the touch is not
light at all.

Summing up the 2nd Variation, Anderszewski is all alone at the top;
the bottom occupants are Barenboim, Yudina, Sokolov, and Roberts.  I am
confident that Barenboim's is the most perverse and could be called a joke
of a performance.  Just give it a listen; close your eyes and you could
find yourself at the Hyatt-Regency closest to home.

3rd Variation - This variation is the first and one of the few which has a
cantabile flow.  The previous music has been strong, relatively sharp, and
loaded with underlying tension; the 4th variation is also in this category.
The 3rd variation allows the performer to provide a beautiful and relaxed
contrast with what has come before and what will follow.

Most of the reviewed versions are in the 1 1/2 minute range; this includes
Ricter/70.  However, four diverge significantly from the norm.  Mustonen
and Bruins are just a little over a minute, while Sokolov and Barenboim
approach two minutes.

 From my view, the 3rd variation plays a pivotal role at this early
stage in the work, one that at first blush would be better presented at
the slower tempos provided by Sokolov and Barenboim for enhanced contrast
and poignancy.  The slow route is well served by Barenboim and a perfect
match for Sokolov.  Although both versions are thoroughly relaxed and
gorgeous, Sokolov is the one who's flow is most in the cantabile range.
He also is lovingly reflective and gives the most expressive/expansive
reading among the fifteen versions just as he does in the 1st variation.

Of the two quick versions, I much prefer Mustonen to Bruins.  While
Mustonen sounds natural in pacing with some fine nuances, Bruins sounds
rushed and too straight-forward.

That leaves eleven versions of moderate tempo, and Pollini's is a gem.
His phrasing is lovely and emotionally incisive; the reading also is
luxurious one.  Equally rewarding and quite similar are the performances
from Serkin, both Richters, Anderszewski, Yudina, Brendel, and Horszowski.
The most demonstrative of these seven is Brendel, but he contrasts this
feature very well with his more tender passages.

Kinderman's performance is on the level of Sokolov's; both explore the
music's terrain in exquisite fashion.  Schnabel is a little problematic;
his beginning is slightly perfunctory, and his overall flow doesn't sway
smoothly.  Also, there are annoying breaks in the sound.  Uneven flow is a
much bigger issue with Roberts who indulges in some choppy phrasing which
sounds cute rather than insightful.

Update - Using the thoroughly discredited Satz Rating Model(SRM), these are
the rounded point totals through the 3rd variation:

Richter/70.....8
Anderszewski...8
Kinderman......8
Sokolov........8
Richter/86.....7
Pollini........7
Brendel........7
Barenboim......7
Horszowski.....7
Yudina.........6
Schnabel.......6
Serkin.........6
Bruins.........5
Mustonen.......5
Roberts........4

Each of the four leaders is displaying a rock-solid command of
architecture, but plenty of the others do that as well.  The Sokolov
and Anderszewski versions are shaping up to be the most expressive
interpretations of the reviewed recordings.  Kinderman is a model of good
taste and proportion.  However, I'm not convinced as of yet that any of
these three artists has the disposition to really let loose as the program
continues.  Concerning Richter/70, my confidence level is much higher.  But
these are just projections which can often get debunked when listening is
completed.

Mustonen continues to carve out his own unique path, and I always look
forward to his next interpretation.  Bruins needs to be careful not to
throw away his opportunites for diversity and contrast; so far he has one
basic approach - fast and exciting.  Unfortunately, that won't go far with
some of the variations such as the 3rd.  Roberts is getting cute with his
interpretations, and I don't care for it.  His musical inspiration is not
high enough for him to take unusual paths.  I think his best bet is to
return to the refined and mainstream style he exhibited in the 1st
variation.

I've said very little about Brendel up to this point.  He is giving
excellent readings, but there's always a few other versions I prefer.
One little negative is the sound quality, not very good for the time
period.  There's a significant hiss, and the piano sound is rather glassy.
It's not a big deal, but his sound isn't able to enhance the enjoyment of
the performances.  I even prefer the sound on Richter/70.

I have been very impressed with the quality of the fifteen versions.
Although Roberts is currently at the bottom, I can imagine much less
rewarding performances.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]