Brahms, Rhapsody in G minor Op. 79/2 played by Artur Schnabel

[snaaptaker]

And yes, Friedman was certainly a "Pole" apart from Schnabel! :-))

[paulprocopolis]

@snaaptaker Ha ha - a very german(e) comment I think!

[Pianoplayer002]

could somebody enlighten me, what are some of the technical errors in this wonderfully musical recording that makes it sooo bad for some of you people around here?

[shelver93]

For some reason, this is really good music to write an essay to. Beautiful music that seems to be quite inspiring!

[paulprocopolis]

@shelver93 What's your essay on??

[snaaptaker]

Technique, Schmecnique!! This has been just about my all-time favorite recording of this Rhapsody for the past 40-or-so years. I don't think you will ever hear it played better.

[nozeadinpencizx]

@snaaptaker I agree with you! This is indeed a "sturdy" performance and beautifully executed. Thank heaven it was recorded (and saved) before Schnabel died.

[downtoearthwildguy]

Friedman was a subtle and brilliant Chopin pianist. Schnabel was expert at the central German repertoire (Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms Schubert). They both studied with the same teacher, Theodore Leschetisky--a direct musical descendant from Beethoven. It's ironic that Freidman studied with him since he was a "Beethoven"/German tradition teacher. I don't think Schnabel recorded any Chopin? They are utterly different pianists.

[uhartchristian]

If you see alfred brendels career it is a bit similar. a very good musician and lots of problems with the technical realisation. they were both very talented and both had to find their way with little help from their teachers as they did not have really good ones. Richter and Gilels and Horowitz for example had very good teachers. Argerich too.

[paulprocopolis]

Schnabel studied with Leschetitzky, who was considered to be one of the finest teachers of the time. His other pupils included Moiseiwitsch, Friedman and Paderewski!

[uhartchristian]

thank you for this information. Ignaz Friedman did record ballades and a lot of mazurkas of chopin and his technique was incredible, his musicality too. Schnabel wasn t at that technical level. musically yes of course he was.

[paulprocopolis]

I agree that Friedman was technically way above Schnabel and although, as you say, they were equals musically, they were also poles apart I think, Schnabel being the much more 'modern' of the two.

[uhartchristian]

that Schnabel was modern is your personal view as mine is that Friedman was much more elegant and delicate in taste.

His 4th chopin ballade is a milestonerecording. His friedman-gaertner danses are important documents of austrian jewish culture which schnabel does not represent. he seems to have been very "german" in his way of living and playing.... the german culture was his center of interest... friedman no.

[ayso78]

Alas, Friedman never recorded the 4th ballade!

[uhartchristian]

sorry to tell you that you are not well informed , I do have the recording by Ignaz Friedman with the 'th ballade of Chopin!!! He did record quite some works of Chopin. Very interesting are the Mazurkas Friedman did record quite some of them. Specially the early ones.

[ayso78]

...said the person who claimed Schnabel had an undistinguished teacher. Unfortunately, the whole of Friedman's discography is comprised of several discs, and he only recorded the 3rd ballade. Your recording is very likely misattributed, and reference to a discography would confirm this. Just the other day, another Youtube user claimed to have several Chopin etude recordings by Michelangeli....

[uhartchristian]

wellI have to answer you: first I am allowed to have an opinion? I like Schnabel but his technique is not the best existing.... second concerning Ignaz Friedman et son enregistrement de la 4eme Ballade de Chopin. editè par Harold L. Powell , Klavier Records 5652 Willowcrest Av , North Hollywood. USA. Copyright 1973 .

I don t think anybody else would have been able to play the finish of this 4th Balade that quick as Friedman did....

But if you are sure about what you say so you know it better...

[ayso78]

The coda is fast because that's a PIANO ROLL.

[uhartchristian]

So you finally changed mind and accept that he did record this 4th ballade.... about the tempo in general the piano rolls do reflect the right tempo as it was recorded. They did not change the tempo artificially. I feel that you don t like this pianist who really had incredible possibilities and who was a great musician too.... His recordings of Chopin Mazurkas are still "the" reference,,,,

[ayso78]

On the contrary, most piano rolls don't even come close to accurately representing artists, and there is a famous Schnabel quote as to why he chose not to make them himself. I've heard the Friedman rolls on Nimbus, and they leave much to be desired. No, I don't consider it to be a "recording," and agree to disagree with you with regard to tempos, which are often up to the person playing back the roll.

[pianopera]

Powerful and expressive performance, beautiful tone production, played with depth and strength, intelligently phrased and great contrast in dynamics. The part starting at 3:39 is really out of this world!

As for the nonsensical criticism that is written here, it is best to ignore it...

[ejasiewicz]

You may be right about the criticism, but I may have misunderstood, too. Either way, thanks for pointing out what you like in this performance. Schnabel was one of the most amazing pianissimo players, as in the place you specify (I wonder how much was due to his Bechstein?). I particularly like the wild, unleashed sound he gets at the recap. And not from volume, too...

[suzettegm]

Wonderful surprise, thanks for posting!

[Tadek59]

Thanks for share shela2 !

The beautiful composition !

Brilliant !

5*****

[berlinzerberus]

ich bin kein freund von artur schnabel.zugegeben,brahms muss nicht immer gewichtig klingen,aber er darf nie flüchtig und fahrig gespielt werden,eine alternative zu diesem interpretationsideal ist glenn goulds luzide,in fahles licht getauchte brahms sicht.schnabels technische bedeutung ist gering,jedoch werden die mängel,im gegensatz zu wilhelm kempff zum beispiel,nicht durch eine überbordende fantasie ausgeglichen.

schnabel´s interpretationen hinterlassen einen merkwürdigen nachgeschmack.

[ejasiewicz]

More nonsense, if I understand correctly. Schnabel sat on Brahms's lap as a young prodigy and knew his artistic milieu intimately. He also easily worked his way through Liszt's repertoire when he was younger. That he chose to ignore such repertoire later is no proof of his tech. insufficiency, despite naysayers who generally focus on his lack of rote practicing artifacts (which is a good thing) and therefore misunderstand his interpretive choices.

[berlinzerberus]

...than you should tell me his "interpretive choices".but i can understand that you,as an fan of mme.norton,she admired schnabel enough,are somewhat fundamentalistic involved in artur schnabel.but i must say that it

is a pity that i never could listen to mr.schnabel live because i "entered the world" much much later.

[ejasiewicz]

I was a student of Norton and K U Schnabel, but that has no bearing on this point. Both Schn. and GG produced what they wished well enough. To suggest Schn. was technically frustrated in realizing his conclusions is foolhardy and presumptuous.

[berlinzerberus]

well...i didnt say that schnabel was frustrated technically,but in truth i was always frustrated about schnabel´s technique listening to him.his pianoplay was not of prime importance technically.mostly he played too fast,too hectically and too flutteringly.mind you it´s not the lots of wrong notes that irritates me permanently.

the main reason for those technical lacks was surely schnabel´s horrible stage fright from that he suffered his full life and that he never could overcome.

[ejasiewicz]

Well, I'm sorry his flaws ruin it for you. Personally, I celebrate that Schnabel chose not to play like a common drone who mindlessly prioritizes delivery. Best wishes.

[Sinfoniette]

Love Schnabel's Brahms....thanks.

[shela2]

Brahms 2 Piano Concertos and most of his piano music I think , is for men only department . and generally needs the strength of a giant But , for me, All of his orchestral works and with soloists, are  his supreme gift to the world of classical music,,

[ejasiewicz]

Yes, it's tough. But, Schnabel's comment to a female student who loved the concertos but was also afraid to play them was "Nonsense! Music knows no sex!"

[pianopera]

Was this 'female student' Eunice Norton by any chance? I love her Handel-Variations!

And what about Myra Hess and Etelka Freund? Two female Brahmsians of the highest order!

[ejasiewicz]

Yes, as a matter of fact! I hope shela2 and all female pianists will not hesitate to try to learn the 2nd. We need more women's perspective on...everything!

[berlinzerberus]

i am not your opinion!!!......hehe-----> LOLL

[chrispiano1]

Thanks ejasiewicz!

I'm a female pianist & I've been playing it (sort of) since about 1979! I've always loved it!! I'm now really enjoying learning it "properly" at last, to play as a Diploma piece!! :-)

Fascinating to hear all the different versions on here!