Robert Schumann(1810-1856)
     Bunte Blatter, Opus 99

The general consensus is that Robert Schumann's late piano works are much
less inspired than his earlier entries.  However, if a work such as the
Bunte Blatter (early 1850's) is lower in inspiration, the answer can not
really be assigned to Schumann's late period.  For example, each of the
fourteen pieces of the Bunte Blatter originated during his 'peak' period.
This was music that Schumann discarded when he composed masterpieces such
as Carnaval, Kreisleriana, and Kinderszenen.

For better or worse, in 1850 Schumann collected the discarded music
and rearranged some of it to come up with the Bunte Blatter and the
Albumblatter.  Although fine works, they don't and will never attain the
popularity of his current 'hits'.  What's missing? To get to that answer,
I think it's mandatory to have a good idea of what's so great about his
best piano works.

Melodic inspiration is certainly a factor, and a prime example is the Piano
Concerto which certainly didn't reach great popularity based on structural
considerations.  It's the melodies and flow which generate the love of the
work.

Personally, my favorite aspects of Schumann's piano music largely stem
from his somewhat 'twisted' psychology.  Mood swings are extreme, contrasts
are stunning, abrupt changes are a constant, and we are always aware that
Schumann is giving us his entire heart and soul.  With the Bunte Blatter,
the melodies are less stunning, mood changes are more in the normal range,
and Schumann *sounds* like a regular guy.  Also, he didn't give this work
his best, particularly since he used discarded material.

Why bother with the Bunte Blatter? Well, a lesser Schumann still strongly
beats the highest levels attained by most composers.  The work has to be
taken on its own value without reference to better days in the past.

Given that the composition is 'lesser' Schumann, recordings have not been
frequent and most great pianists have stayed away.  But at least Richter
is available on Olympia, and I'll review his performance later in this
project.

I'm starting out with the following three versions:

Youri Egorov.....EMI 74191(1985)
Lars Vogt........EMI 555425(1994)
Arcadi Volodos...Sony 60893(1997)

The major name among these pianists is Mr.  Volodos.  He stormed onto
the music scene and has been gobbling up the raves and projections that
he might just end up being the greatest pianist ever.  The first two
recordings from RCA were 'cameo' discs for Volodos and elicted immense
praise.  Since then, he has moved toward the bigger works such as
Rachmaninov's 3rd Piano Concerto and Schubert's Piano Sonata D.894.
I happen to be skeptical of such fast acceptance of greatness in this
age of hawking everything and everyone in sight which can make big bucks.
Put another way, an artist has to win my affection totally through muscial
considerations.

Never knowing what the future holds, Arcadi Volodos will ultimately
be judged on his artistry(I hope), and I also hope that he has the right
stuff unlike so many others such as Charlotte Church.  I also assume that
Volodos has a warm spot for the Bunte Blatter; he sure didn't present it
at Carnegie Hall because it's such a familiar crowd pleaser.

Whereas the Egorov 2-cd set and the Vogt disc are devoted to Schumann,
Volodos offers a recital consisting of, in addition to the Bunte Blatter,
the music of Liszt, Rachmaninov, and Scriabin.  When first released, the
disc garnered glowing reviews.

Unfortunately, I don't have glowing remarks about the Volodos performance
of the Bunte Blatter.  Certainly, his technique is abundant, but technique
is not as important in Schumann as in many other composers.  Essentially,
I feel that Volodos misses a crucial element of Schumann's music which
reduces the pleasures to be derived from the recording.

That crucial element is a youthful vitality and spring which the
majority of recording artists well convey.  These qualities are what makes
Schumann's piano music more rewarding for me than Chopin's.  Take them
away, and Schumann's music loses some its great appeal.

My basic view is that Volodos is overly mature in his style, and two
particular features highlight the lack of youthful vigor.  First, his
articulation can be quite subdued as in the poignant 1st Movement.
Although he provides more nuance, hesitations, and diversity to this
movement than either Vogt or Egorov, the emotional depth and impact is no
greater as the articulation is rather dreamy and smooth.  Second, when the
articulation is strong, as in the exciting 2nd Movement, Volodos is let
down by the engineering which doesn't allow for signficant lift to the
music.  The overall effect is 'smooth and suave', features which don't
really connect with Schumann's soundworld.  Even in the heroic and
exuberant 3rd Movement where Volodos is spot-on, the notes simply do
not jump out of the speakers.

The 4th Movement of exquisite sadness and a bitter/sweet 6th are centered
by a thrilling 5th Movement which totally 'busts out' toward the conclusion.
Volodos sounds mighty good on his own; he excellently captures the poignancy
of the music, and the thrills are admirable in the 5th Movement.  However,
switch to Egorov and the feelings are more intense and the 5th Movement is
an orgy of macabre thrills.  Again, the Volodos sound stage does him no
favors; Egorov's sound is much more vital and expansive.

The 8th Movement is a perfect example of how artist and sound combine
to take a step backwards.  How might this movement work best? Well, the
7th Movement is a heavy one, the 9th is fast and exciting, with the 10th
giving a ferocious display.  The 8th Movement is a great time for lightness
and a delicate approach conveying an uplifiting spirit.  Lars Vogt is
particularly inspiring, while Volodos is a 'downer'.  He's ever so sad with
a Capital 'S' as he nuances the hell out the music.  Throw in sound which
doesn't want to take lift, and the result is not very satisfying.

The final four movements are the most extended, each lasting more than
three minutes.  Actually, these four movements take up about half of the
work.  The 11th Movement has a slow and heavy march for a first section;
contrast comes from the quicker and lighter second section which has an
irresistably swaying rhythm.  Volodos acquits himself excellently as he
well conveys a funeral march and the enticing second section; this time,
he's the equal of Vogt and Egorov.

Aside from some weak projection from the soprano voice, Volodos offers
a very attractive 12th Movement; this menuet-style piece is toe-tapping
music with Volodos.  The last two movements are played well, but this also
applies to the Egorov and Vogt performances.

In summary, the Volodos version of the Bunte Blatter is certainly recommend
as an enjoyable performance, but there's quite a distance between Volodos
and truely inspiring interpretation.  Put another way, I detect no special
properties in the Volodos version and do not feel that he offers the best
performance of any of the fourteen movements.

Although I do prefer the Lars Vogt performance to the Volodos, Vogt has one
particular trait which holds his version back from being exceptional.  It
concerns a few of the slower and more contemplative movements where Vogt
exhibits some wooden/stiff phrasing and pacing which reduces the music's
poignancy.

Youri Egorov stays clear of any damaging habits.  His readings are
generally vibrant and very youthful when appropriate; levels of poignancy
are excellent in the slower movements, and exuberance and excitement are
high in the fast pieces.  There are a few movements where Lars Vogt does
surpass Egorov for providing drive or emotional depth, but my overall
perception is that Egorov is the most consistenly satisfying of the three
artists.

Don's Conclusions:  Each of the three reviewed versions is rewarding with
Egorov taking the lead with an excellent set of performances.  Vogt is very
enjoyable and should appeal to most listeners.  Concerning Volodos, his
version is a good one for those who like their Schumann on the 'smooth and
suave' side.

I will be reviewing a few more versions including the Richter on Olympia.
There's a decent amount of room for a performance better than the Egorov,
and we'll see if any of them reach the zenith.  In the meantime, I am very
impressed with Egorov and recommend him highly in the Bunte Blatter.

Don Satz
[log in to unmask]