Frederic Chopin(1810-1849)
       Preludes, Opus 28

To recap from Part 1, Benno Moiseiwitsch enjoys a commanding advantage
over the other six versions through the first twelve preludes.  Alfred
Cortot, although far behind Moiseiwitsch, has a strong hold on the second
position.  Pogorelich's performances have been disappointing in that he
applies a 'grouping' formula:  very fast for the quicker preludes, very
slow for the more poignant preludes, and every one of them gets the stark
treatment.

Prelude No.  13 in F sharp major(Lento) - This prelude brings up a number
of performance issues.  At a minimum, the F sharp major is a contemplative
and nostalgic piece of great beauty.  That's how Ashkenazy treats it, and
he delivers a sublime reading with exceptional articulation and inflections
highlighting the music's poetry; changes in tempo and dynamics are few and
far-between.

Another approach is to enlarge its scope mainly through dynamics and
tempo such as done by Cortot and Pires.  Then there's the Pogorelich
formula which results in a reading approaching five minutes, while the
others are all more than minute faster.  Pogorelich offers the sound of
'Chopin on Librium', although he certainly brings out the beauty and
reflection of the piece.

Two of the seven issues are not very rewarding:  Rev and Zaritzkaya.
Similar to Ashkenazy, Rev doesn't stray far from her basic tempo and
volume.  However, she isn't close to providing the gorgeous performance
Ashkenazy offers; 'ordinary' best describes my reaction.  As for
Zaritzkaya, her performance lacks some fluidity and flows in a sputtering
fashion.

My favored version, followed closely by Ashkenazy's, comes from Alfred
Cortot.  He injects strong urges into the music, but never takes the
somewhat overwrought direction of Pires.  Through changes in tempo and
dynamics, Cortot gives us a multi-chapter/dimensional interpretation.
Moiseiwitsch is excellent but more limiting than Cortot.

Prelude No.  14 in E flat minor(Allegro) - This piece gives off a macabre
atmosphere as it excites and creates danger.  It's all based on tension,
with much of it coming from the strongly swirling bass line.

Being an Allegro, Pogorelich offers the fastest reading.  That doesn't
insure great tension, and Pogorelich is rather weak with his bass line.
The same low tension from the bass line is from Ashkenazy.  The other
versions are excellent, and I should mention that Pires uses a distinctive
staccato to good effect.

Prelude No.  15 in D flat major - If you love great contrasts between
sections, the "Raindrop" Prelude is made to order.  After a first section
of sublime sadness, the second section rises from the bowels of the Earth
in a desperate attempt to escape emotional emptiness.  This rising from the
bottom is best conveyed by Ashkenazy whose bass chords are like granite.
Cortot and Pires corner the market on exquisite sadness which gently enters
the soul.

I would have likely placed the masculine Moiseiwitsch version with the
three versions above, but the sound quality is such that the bass chords
have no definition and therefore little impact.  Rev and Pogorelich occupy
the low spot with relatively weak second sections and nothing special
conveyed in the first section.  Once again, Pogorelich gives us the slowest
version by far.  It's getting so that one can accurately predict how
Pogorelich will perform a specific prelude, and that's not good at all.

Prelude No.  16 in B flat minor(Presto con fuoco) - The chase is on, and
it's very exciting.  Actually, this is one of Chopin's pieces best suited
to offer thrills; there's rapid-fire scale passages with figures darting
all over the spectrum.

In addition to listening to Livia Rev's Preludes, I've been sampling
her other Chopin discs; frankly, I haven't been impressed.  She tends to
smooth-out Chopin's music and fully concentrate on beauty to the neglect
of other essential ingredients.  She does it again in the B flat minor,
and I can't think of any good reason to prioritize the beauty in this
prelude.  So I listen to her performance and wonder - is that all I get?.
Then I move over to Pogorelich who makes the music come alive with his
greater speed and much better articulation; he's powerful, vivid, on the
verge of frenzy, and totally free of sentimentality.  His lower voices
are so much more alert and part of the interplay than Rev's.  Of course,
Pogorelich remains true to "The Formula", but it pays large dividends this
time around.  Another excellent version comes from Zaritzkaya.  Her upper
voice clarity is amazing, allowing the listener to follow every frenetic
turn.

Of course, why settle for a great left hand or a fabulous right hand
when both are on display in Cortot's magnificent performance.  Each voice
seems to be totally unrelated to one another, as Cortot allows as much
voice independence as possible while somehow keeping the house in order.
For the vintage of the recording, the detail Cortot provides is astounding.
It's a risky approach, but the rewards are huge.  There's no doubt this
is a transcendent interpretation, and the execution is flawless.  The
remaining versions of the B flat minor are fine but quite forgettable.

Prelude No.  17 in A flat major(Allegretto) - One of the most lovely
preludes in the set, a subtle sadness and longing blends with a great
sense of satisfaction; the contrasts are so enticing, and the piece highly
evocative of the most satisfying times in one's life.

The above is how I hear the piece best presented, but Ashkenazy clearly
has a different concept in mind.  He plays the music for high drama and
obliterates its comforting and nostalgic elements; I'll pass on this one.

Rev is stingy with nuance, and her performance is somewhat boring.
Cortot sounds rushed to me, and Moiseiwitsch and Pires veer toward
Ashkenazy's approach.  That leaves Pogorelich and Zaritzkaya; they're not
among the best on record but they at least maintain balanced proportions
and deliver much of the music's beauty.  Also, unlike with most of his
preludes, Pogorelich treats the A flat major with a moderate tempo - how
refreshing it is.

Update:  I wouldn't have thought it possible, but Cortot is quickly
gaining ground on Moiseiwitsch.  The first twelve preludes tended to belong
to Moiseiwitsch, and Cortot is carving out the latter twelve for himself.
The other five versions are way behind these two exceptional performances.

Prelude No.  18 in F minor(Allegro molto) - Very dramatic music of
great tension and intensity.  The tension begins immediately with the
introduction of two searing bass chords, but Moiseiwitsch and Zaritzkaya
offer ineffectual and subuded bass chords.  Cortot and Pogorelich put
plenty of heat and angst into their performances, but it's Pires whose
tension is at peak levels and never lets us off the hook.  The F minor
has all the ingredients to grab the listener by the throat, and Pires
does just that.

Prelude No.  19 in E flat major(Vivace) - In a moto perpetuo pattern,
tension is also important in the E flat major, but it's now of the subtle
variety and provided largely by the music's swells.  Both Askenazy and Rev
strike-out with indistinct and mild swells, merely ending up sounding
pretty.

Pogorelich is a step up with the fastest performance of the group and
a distinctive staccato effect.  It's an interesting reading, but an
experiment which doesn't cohere very well.  Zaritzkaya gets the swells
right, but her performance is a little lacking in fluidity.  Highly fluid
readings with effective swells come from Cortot, Pires, and Moiseiwitsch.

Prelude No.  20 in C minor(Largo) - If you took all human sadness, remorse,
and regret, they would fit into the famous C minor Prelude.  Pogorelich
is a little undernourished and lacking angst.  Rev's and Zaritzkaya's
accenting and inflections are so weak that the performances pass by without
impact.

After listening to the three above readings, it is a pleasure to move on to
Pires and Ashkenazy who supply some of life's energy to the music; of the
two, I prefer the Pires which has very incisive inflections conveying much
remorse.  Cortot and Moiseiwitsch are also incisive, but their tempos are
a little too quick to convey all the C minor's emotional depth.  Pires is
the star of the C minor with her perfect pacing and poignant intervals.

Prelude No.  21 in B flat major(Cantabile) - I'm likely going against the
tide, but I don't feel the B flat major well accomodates much urgency or
brute power; it just sounds like empty bombast to me, given the relatively
low tension of most of the music.  Four versions are loaded with urgency
and power:  Moiseiwitsch, Cortot, Pires, and Ashkenazy.  There is much to
enjoy in these four readings, but the bombast kills it for me.  Livia Rev
offers little to enjoy with a most ordinary rendition which seems to be her
penchant in these pieces.

The versions from Zaritzkaya and Pogorelich are quite slow and benefits are
derived from it.  With an average timing of about 2 minutes, Zaritzkaya
extends to 2 1/2 minutes.  She illuminates the textures and also is much
better proportioned than most other versions.

If I thought that Zaritzkaya was slow-paced, that's nothing compared to
the 3 minute interpretation from Pogorelich.  Unlike in most of his other
very slow readings, there are no empty spaces here.  Instead, he offers a
fine examination of some delectable secondary voices which totally win my
affection.

Prelude No.  22 in G minor(Molto agiatato) - Very destabilizing music with
its persistent traces of dissonance.  When listening, I tend to get images
of hyper-active drunks lurching all over the place.

Each of the seven versions, except for Rev, well convey the lurching and
lack of balance.  As for Rev, she really doesn't have much affinity with
'molto' or 'agitato'.  My preferred versions come from Moiseiwitsch and
Cortot; with these two artists, I feel a strong dose of human desperation
not found in the other versions.

Prelude No.  23 in F major(Moderato) - If any one of Chopin's Preludes
can fit in well with the style of Livia Rev, the F major fills the need.
It is drop-dead gorgeous, delicate, and dream-like; Rev takes to it like
a duck to water.  Actually, each of the seven pianists does a great job.
Zaritzkaya is every so slow and poignant, while the fast versions from
Moiseiwitsch, Cortot, and Pogorelich provide an attractive urgency.

Prelude No.  24 in B minor(Allegro maestro) - Chopin must have been feeling
like a tower of negative energy when he wrote the last prelude of the set.
The oppressive energy coming from the lower voices is so pervasive and
commmanding that it can't be penetrated.  Instead, it keeps building up
and tumbling out in great washes of sound, simply obliterating anything or
anybody getting in its way.  I think it's a great way to end the work and
it reminds me strongly of Scriabin's approach to lower voices - grab them
by the throat.

The above description doesn't sound like a good recipe for Livia Rev.
Although she has been unrewarding in some previous preludes, she saves her
worst for last.  Given the music, she is entirely innocuous and the ending
note repeated two times has no impact at all.  I'd be willing to bet big
bucks that Rev would be as ineffectual playing Scriabin.

Turning to Zaritzkaya is quite a relief.  Her's is a version to sink your
teeth into.  The lower voices growl without relief, and she gets to the
heart of the music.  My only reservation is that I don't feel Zaritzkaya
does well in making connections between the lower and upper voices.  It
takes much technical ability and superb timing to get this prelude right,
and Zaritzkaya doesn't quite display the necessary equipment.

Ashkenazy's beginning had me thinking that he offered everything that
Zaritzkaya did but with much better control of the music's structure.
Unfortunately, he soon 'loosens the screws' and never really tightens them
again.  I do applaud his proud and hammering repeated-note conclusion, but
there are problems with this interpretation.

Pgorelich is something else, because he excels where the three above
pianists fail.  His command of structure is complete, so his readings has
an air of absolute inevitability; in fact, he sounds as if he has mastered
the principles of intonatsia.  As for tension and anguish, Pogorelich is
at peak levels.  Unlike Ashkenazy, Pogorelich actually gets stronger and
more oppressive as the music progresses.  To cap it off, his concluding
repeating notes make me feel like Dracula having a stake shoved through his
heart.  It's an industrial strength performance which I greatly admire in
addition to emotionally hitting all the right buttons.

Each of the three remaining versions is problematic.  The amount of 'slack'
in Cortot's reading is a killer, Pires keeps varying the tension as if she
isn't sure which path to take, and Moiseiwitsch's recording won't allow his
tremendous lower voices to have definition.

Don's Conclusions:  The Cortot and Moiseiwitsch versions are the gems in
this group of seven recordings of Chopin's Preludes.  Of course, neither
Moiseiwitsch nor Cortot enjoys excellent sound quality, but the sound for
Cortot is alive and allows for much detail.  I should also note that this
exact Cortot performance is available from EMI and costs much less than a
Philips Great Pianist volume.

The Pires version is better than the average with plenty of vitality
and emotional depth.  My main reservation is that she takes the overblown
romanticized route now and then.  Pogorelich's performances are also quite
good, although his 'formula' concerning tempo and texture does detract from
his artistry and technical wizardry.  Zaritzkaya can be somewhat pedestrian
and undernourished, but her recording has the right price and is generally
satisfying.

I can't recommend the Rev or Ashkenazy performances.  Rev wants to
play Chopin for beauty and ends up giving short shrift to the extremes
of Chopin's emotional messages.  Ashkenazy just doesn't offer anything
distinctive or special; further, the Decca sound quality isn't even as
good as what Cortot has to work with.

There are many more versions from my library to cover - up to thirty.
I think there's plenty of room for performances to surpass the Cortot and
Moiseiwitsch by offering greater consistency of excellence.  Stay tuned for
Part 2 which will include the touted Argerich interpretation.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]