Good for n00bs that Gould didn't record Chopin and Liszt works .. he let you some material too express yourself and think you are good on it , cause if you play some Bach you know you suck :D
There is wonderful poise and restraint in this performance compared to which mainstream renditions sound hectic and over-heated. As in many other cases people are doing the mistake of looking for something which the artist does not intend to offer and ignore what he does bring out.
Always so much controversy over Gould... ALWAYS. Look, Gould wasn't trying to do anything other than play the music how he wanted to hear it. Everything he did was out of his sincere love for music. No one loved hearing the pure clarity of each note more than Gould, and that comes out in everything he's done.
This is the most ridiculous version of this piece ever recorded. Gould is more accurate than a MIDI card on a computer. Having said that, this is the only pianist I have ever heard who plays the central development section correctly. Other pianists play it in a frenzy with fits and starts. I don't think that's correct. I think Glenn Gould got it right.
I suspect Chopin would be the last to say which is the wrong way to play his music: when a composer publishes a work, he's letting the world try different ways of performing it. Gould's tempo doesn't violate the indication of "Allegro maestoso". The performance is supremely musical and makes sense. This would be especially obvious to a music lover who hasn't heard this piece before.
@kingfaicl No. There're things written on the score that must be respected. Legatos, phrasings, themes, it isn't just the tempo that he isn't following. He's just playing notes, but he isn't playing what is written.
Jesus!... Partisanship, aside from slowly fucking our political systems, is now ruining our music as well? "Chopin rejected Bach/Chopin loved Bach, wanted everything played like Bach"... ever consider that both may be in some way true? Nah, lets just pick sides; with us or against us... who's first?!
A great and deep Chopin study... People tend to like the nearest possible version of sonatas, etudes or whatever. We should accept interprets as what they are, interprets. We all knew Gould would play that sonata like this. Does it make it worse than the original version ?
For all the haters, have you actually tried LISTENING? It doesn't sound like a fugue. It sounds Romantic, and it sounds amazing. Give credit where credit is due; Gould turns this into a masterful session.
I guess to add to the random issues of 'facts' and apparent knowing and opinions whether or not Gould is playing this to make fun or is generally taking into consideration respect for the music... consider chopin greatly admired Bach, think how chopin might have played his own works.... in a way this is how I would imagine it to be. The "idea" of chopin, when I hear people play chopin is like whishy washy emotional turn arounds.... This is how I think he would have played it.. maybe close.
@andrewfinch1: Actually, it's not nonsense. Haydn was a great exponent of it and he passed it's elements on to Beethoven. Beethoven, as we know embodied both classical and romantic elements through out the the three phases of his musical development. Just because you are not able to see the connection immediately does not mean you should label it as nonsense.
@fbager: Great nationalism, folkloric melodies and such prevailed, and although Bach's music is profoundly beautiful, especially the Goldberg variations(which I have played many times), it is quite simply not romantic. Yes, there are romantic elements, but it is NOT romantic. You clearly are not able to define the parameters between good baroque playing and good romantic playing. Gould simply was not a good Chopin performer.
@fbager: You clearly have little or no understanding of the romantic era. Furthermore, if you knew anything about Gould, you would know that he very much disliked Chopin, as well he disliked Mozart. Gould admitted so in many interviews. Chopin did not "convince him." The romantic era is best personified in the words of Byronic literature or indeed the sturm und drang movement in Germany.
@Chopin1974 Nonsense. Sturm und Drang in music has little to do with musical Romanticism, though it may have prefigured it. It was a brief period, and it is associated with late Rococo and early Classical composers. The romantic era is NOT best personified, indeed or otherwise, by the Sturm und Drang movement in Germany.
That said, this is a silly performance, and is designed to show that giving equal prominence to the voices tears the music apart.
His choice of tempo has absolutely nothing to do with his bias for 'musical structure' or 'contrapuntal approach'. It is just plain wrong for reasons too obvious to mention.
While I prefer other interpretations, this one is fascinating. I wouldn't say it lacks emotion; I would just say it lacks (probably by design) an affinity with how the piece was intended to be played. The adherence to tempo and almost complete lack of rubatto, the emphasis on clarity of voices and counterpoint instead of the fluidity of the overall sound - it's a style that's perfectly suited to Bach, but not at all for Chopin, though it is very interesting to hear.
@thinkpad20 Ya I think Gould was mostly interested in the structure of music...in the sense that the deep attention to structure in contrapuntal music was an incredibly profound statement that people should pay attention to. My feeling about this recoding I can sum up in a few words: it doesn't really sound "unromantic" the passion in the playing is evident. For me, I find the incredible tension and release to be more romantic than the shaky rubato from many recordings.
@thinkpad20 Chopin was also a very structural composer. What do we really mean when we talk about a "classical" composer and a "romantic" or "post romantic" composer or any of this. This is mostly babble from "critics" who spend their lives categorizing something that cannot be categorized. If you look at the way Chopin notated his scores, he most certainly places each voice distinctly, when he doesn't. it isn't much different from a baroque composer shortly notating an acceptable convention?
IDK, I really try to hear a lack of passion in this recording but I haven't figured it out yet. There is so much intensity in the way the notes are held and released, the phrasing...I know I'm not crazy...I think the problem a lot of people have with Gould is that he keeps a regular rhythm, which in the romantic repertoire is unusual, but within that there to me is a lot more passion and meaning than just spewing random emotion about the keyboard as is custom with "romantic" music.
You know, I wonder if some of the negativity concerning this recording isn't due to the sound on Youtube. If you can get "Glenn Gould plays Romantics 1" I think that's the compilation it is on currently. I actually had it on cassette version along with the set that had all the 20th century stuff on it, anyway, the mp3 is incredibly more rich and nuanced, it reveals the INTENSE emotion in this recording. I guess if your idea of emotion is lots of random rubato...
It would be funny if someone actually put up a 'midi performance' of a piece of music and tried to pass it off as Gould's. It would be interesting to hear people defending the authority of Gould's interpretation. Gould is my favourite pianist by the way.
@steamednotfried Ya I don't think anyone who has listened to even one Gould recording would think his playing is MIDI like. I almost find it bizarre that so many people seem to find this playing not "emotional". I wonder if it is because he chooses a very regular rhythm overall, or more likely, because he doesn't get "mad violent on teh keys" or some other thing people expect to hear. There is tons of musically relevant emotion in every measure so idk what fault lies in this recording. : /
Anyone can just "play" this piece like it says on the paper, but it takes a real genius (like Glenn Gould) to give it a uniqueness and allow it to be "expressive". I've got one good reason of his genius, which will prove to all of you who think otherwise that he is one: decades later, and we still debate his performances (just like we still debate Mozart and Beethoven and Chopin) that is what makes him a true genius, and indeed an artist.
Thank you for reading; thumbs up = if you love art
He doesnt make te music sound romantic at all.This piece is beautifu,l but played like this is like my computer program for midis. Gould is a genius no doubt, but for mozart, bach, any barroque composer........never Chopin. My opinion.
So sentimental and delicated! Its hard to play this piece without runing as a lot of musicians ! It is different but different does not mean bad, just different.
I couldn't listen to the end. Its as though he dropped this impressionistic piece into a vat of cleaning fluid and washed away all the color. His version of the Beethoven Appassionata Sonata has the same quality, lots os sonata but no passion. It is a pointless performance. Its not that I don't like him, I think his Bach, for example, is incredible.
Esecuzione poco chopiniana ma.........assolutamente GENIALE!!!!!!il grande Glenn ha finalmente liberato questo straordinario pezzo da quegli eccessivi sentimentalismi ke ne turbano la purezza........
@Hyrene92 ti quoto ma piu' che sentimentalismi direi manierismi pianistici ,si e' resa con nitidezza e un senso di delicatezza e intensita' incredibile direi timidamente chopin:) piu' vero .
@mahler151 I agree, on Wikipedia it says the following:
"He [Gould] was extremely critical of Frédéric Chopin. In a radio interview, when asked if he didn't find himself wanting to play Chopin, he replied: "No, I don't. I play it in a weak moment — maybe once a year or twice a year for myself. But it doesn't convince me.""
Tempos incohérents, ça ce veut une caricature des mauvais interprètes de Chopin, ce n'est qu'une pitoyable interprétation du premier mouvement de la troisième sonate. Mais Chopin se venge et c'est le p'tit Gould qui sort ridicule de l'exercice : il a mis un nez rouge qu'il ne peut pas retirer... car quand il oublie son projet, d'un coup cela devient pas mauvais... vers 2'30 et suivantes...
Interpretation nazis saying there is only one way of playing Chopin :) Come on... I welcome every interpretation. The more variety, the better. Every human being sees things differently. It's much more valuable than everyone copying everyone else. All Chopin stuff is EXACTLY the same always.
You have to laugh. I love Gould. He was such a brilliant whack job. His pianism, however, leaves much to be desired and even in Bach. He did much, nevertheless, to bring classical music to the forefront, especially Bach. I love Martha Argerich's recording of the c minor Partita but when I listen to her I miss Gould's singing. I really do............. :)
It's typical Gould. In otherwords if it's not Bach, it's not worth listening to. His interpretations of Beethoven and Chopin are both bland and inane. There is no musical expression. Phrasing is completely ignored as are tempi and dynamics. This is romantic music at it's best and he has reduced it to a cacophony of clanging notes. Very poor indeed, and not well played!
@Chopin1976l I agree,this is terrible.I don't know why he wasted his time playing music which he obviously didn't have any feeling for. However,Gould is good in composers other than Bach-eg.Haydn,Sweenlink,Berg,Strauss,Sibelius,Schoenberg and Wagner (Mastersingers overture)
@Chopin1976l I admit that he may not have respected all dynamic markings etc but to me it sounds wonderful and fresh, profoundly un-bland. Although Gould's approach may go against the accepted tradition of Chopin playing, one must not forget that this percieved 'tradition', this accepted 'way' of playing 'romantic' music is very subjective. To dismiss this as 'Chopin badly played, as if it were Bach' infers a misunderstanding of Bach, Chopin and Gould and a simplistic notion of romanticism.
maybe his approach to romantic pieces is quite unusual but I can´t see why we should not give him the credit he had earned during his long and succesful carreer
So Lovely. I love hearing the variety of interpretations. While I can't say this sounds specificially like Glen, it has what it takes to endear this gem to me once again. It is a beautiful here. Thank you.
I have heard a ton of complaints about this interpretation, however to me it is one of the most rapturous interpretation I have heard. I could very well imagine people having diffences with it, but saying is it midi like only marks you as a bad listener and makes no comment on the interpretation at all.
Wow. I forgot how beautiful Gould plays this piece. The counterpoint is played with such clarity and emotion. i never heard so many of the notes that Chopin actually wrote in this piece. What a different effect.
This is great! The piece is shown in a completely different light and played by a complete master of the instrument. It offer's the listener so much insight into the finer points music. So interesting!
Of course, this is not a typical Chopin rendition, but i'm enjoying listen it. Gould shows the polyphonic structure of 1st movement and does it with dense emotional feeling, although he didn't like Chopin.
VerryTemporaryLogin: I agree with you about the "dense" part, but not the emotional feeling part. Call me a "Gould Skeptic" as opposed to a "Gould Worshiper"--it seems that when it comes to opinions about Gould's playing there is little middle ground. Who was the greatest pianist of all time? Some might opine Liszt (no recordings to verify), Hofmann, Rachmaninov, Richter, Horowitz. I think there have been many great pianists (such as those I mentioned), but no "greatest of all time".
"If you don't like it, don't listen to it". Gould was a very complicated artist (all geniuses are complicated). Because geniuses are endlessly fascinating they will always be endlessly analyzed, uncovering imperfections amidst the brilliance. Surely Gould deserves more than such a simplistic throwaway.
@soami2u I think you didn't quite understand my idea. I'm saying "don't listen if you don't like" because he was a genius and he could play the way he wanted. And peole now criticize him forgetting who he was. To me, he's the greatest pianist of all time.
Gould advocated a performer should never outshine the music itself... maybe this performance just reveals what this movement really is without all the acrobatics added by other pianists: a dull boring piece of music. His recording of the fourth movement of this sonata rocks in my opinion, though!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Please stop commenting on GG's interpretation of Chopin's Sonata. Obviously it's not a "orthodox" interpretation and he perfectly knew it. Simply the radio producer told him «Glenn why don't you try with Chopin?» and he simply accepted the challenge. That's all. So, please, stop discussing on "maestoso" and "pesante"... Thanks.
This forum exists to enable listeners to discuss whatever they feel is relevant to the recording. You are wasting your time if you think you can tell people to "stop commenting on GG's interpretation of Chopin's Sonata". Maestoso vs. pesante or GG's hair style--everyone is free to comment on GG here, and comments can range from the ridiculous to the sublime (just like GG's playing). Take your Stalinism somewhere else. Thanks.
Matteo7419: I never tried to force you "to discuss about [my] stupidity", merely to help you to understand that there is such a thing as ideas, or call it diversity of opinion.
My dear friend, I don't need your help to understand that we all think different. Thanks, by the way. I omly told that in THIS particular case, about THIS particular piece, it's totally crazy to discuss about the difference between "moderato" and "pesante", just because the same GG told this was a challenge and he did'nt like the music of FC and it makes no sense to search for an "autenticity" in GG's playing of this music.
Pay attention, Matteo7419, no one ever mentioned the word "moderato"; and it was always obvious from the beginning that GG disliked the music of Chopin (anyone can tell from this recording that he didn't identify with his music the same way he did with Bach's). That doesn't prelude criticism of GG's musicianship here...a consummate musician and pianist should be able to shift gears between different styles of music, and as exemplified here, that GG was unable to do. He didn't "get it"--like you.
@soami2u: No, you don't get it. The point is, it's pointless to accuse Gould of playing this piece not like Chopin wanted it, because this was exactly Gould's intention. Or do you think Gould was too stupid to tell the difference between cresc. and decresc. and therefore plays decres. where Chopin writes cres.? It was Gould's idea of music making to "recreate a work" and "turn performance into composition". Get some information on Gould before you waste your time writing pointless comments here.
@Schamschi: don't waste YOUR time writing pointless comments here. It is the height of arrogance to "turn performance into composition". The composition belongs to CHOPIN, not Glenn Gould. You can make excuses for Gould's performance here until the cows come home, but it's pretty elementary that a good performer follows the COMPOSER'S intentions. Gould never "got it" and neither do you.
If you think Gould is arrogant, that's your problem. It can be solved, however, by watching the video v=M6Zc7P6NsZ8, where Gould explains his view on performance (provided, of course, that you "get it"). If you think I'm trying to make excuses for Gould, that's also your problem, because I only wanted to point out that your attempts to discredit Gould by trying to prove he is not following Chopin's directions are in vain, because he didn't intend to follow Chopin's directions in the first place.
"It's [my] problem". No, Schamschi, I don't think so. I think your attitude is as arrogant as Gould's. Any good musician follows the composer's intentions. It's pretty basic. Don't accuse ME of not "getting it". I guess you don't like Chopin any more than Gould did (yes, it IS the point).
You guessed wrong, I like Chopin. You think any good musician follows the composer's intentions? Well, Gould thought differently, and he, unlike you, had concrete arguments for his opinion. You think I'm as arrogant as Gould? Based on what? I never supported Gould's opinion, neither did I say anything against it, I just tried to explain it to you, because you obviously hadn't got it (and probably still don't get it, seeing as you still think Gould was arrogant - have you even watched the video?)
If anything can be said against Gould, it is the fact that if one doesn't know these things about Gould and his view on performance, and expects, as in this case, the Chopin b minor Sonata, one could indeed feel insulted and deceived, because Gould presents this as Chopin's Sonata, while he actually delivers something different, a "recreation", as he himself puts it, because, even while the notes are by Chopin, the expression isn't. But once you accept that, I think one can appreciate Gould.
And this is probably exactly what motivated Leonard Bernstein to give an introductory speech at the infamous concert where he conducted Brahms' 1st Piano Concerto with Gould as the soloist. Pity the people didn't seem to understand it - or shall I say, to "get it"...
Schamschi: yes, Gould was unconventional, to say the least. The man was probably mentally ill, for one thing. If you know anything about GG you already know he may have suffered from a form of high-functioning autism and possibly even schizophrenia. Thus his view of things (musically and otherwise) could come across (to many) as rather twisted. I can hear it in this performance. But you are one of the chosen few who "gets it"? And you like Chopin?
Well, I don't like Chopin, I LOVE Chopin. And I don't like hearing his works butchered. This performance of Gould's can by no stretch of the imagination be what Chopin intended. Concrete arguments? I think you project. It's less complicated than you think. Yes, I DO think any good musician follows the composer's intentions. Almost everyone agrees GG could be effective in Bach. But not in Mozart or Chopin. Your idea of "not getting it" seems to me more like a difference of opinion.
I've always felt that people who think about music the way you do need to compile some sort of authoritative text dictating the rules of music, commandments so to speak, then demand that everyone adhere to them or they'll be stoned to death or something.
Personally I find this music bland and lifeless--played by Gould or anyone else.
I find Chopin's 2nd sonata especially the first movement to be far superior to this piece.
Dear Emperormiki: "People who think about music the way [I] do"--I plead not guilty! I merely ask that performers consider something called "style"! As to Chopin's 3rd Sonata being "bland and lifeless" in the first mvmt, I think you need to get to know it better! Also, listen to some GREAT performances of the work: Cortot, Novaes and Lipatti (the 3 GREATEST IMO!) I agree that the 1st mvmt of the 2nd sonata is colossal! But I think the later 3rd is a masterpiece too--if more diffuse structurally.
(@ Emperormiki, cont'd): some other great ones: a rare 1935 recording by Hofmann, and a 1964 one by Vlado Perlemuter. Also, many admire the early '50s recording by William Kapell (which I haven't heard). When you hear it played well instead of badly (as here by Glenn Gould), I think you'll like the piece better! :)
Actually I have heard it played by many pianists and although my feelings toward it has obviously changed somewhat over the years (I first began listening intently to "serious" music as a kid) my opinion essentially remained the same about this particular movement.
I find it completely bland and lacking life—thats just my own personal opinion.
My favorite composer, aside from Beethoven, is Ives. I find his music startlingly beautiful for several reasons. I think Ives > Chopin.
Emperormiki: I certainly respect your opinion, but to me saying that Ives is greater than Chopin is a little like saying apples are better than zucchini!
I agree in the sense that Ives' music is DIFFERENT from that of Chopin, but not better...how could you in any real sense say that Shostakovich's music is better than Schubert's?
Actually you can say Ives is better than Chopin or Chopin is better than Ives all you want as that is merely an opinion (as is all music theory)—what you can't say is that Ives is more correct than Chopin.
Perhaps here is where we differ. I think there ARE performances that are more "correct" in the sense that they are more in keeping with what the composer intended--not necessarily "conventional", just stylistically more appropriate (one wouldn't play Beethoven the same way as Debussy!) The Gould performance of the Chopin #3 1st mvmt is to me an example of a performance that is just ALL WRONG in this sense.
Pesante and Masesto are arguably, very similar. Secondly, if chopin had a worry about tempo I am sure he owned a clock in which to give a very speciffic tempo for the piece. Lastly of course, chopin was an artist, Gould is an artist. Chopin realized his music would be interpreted and re-interpreted. All composers realize this.
"Pesante" and "Maestoso" might be arguably very similar if it's one of Elgar's Coronation Marches, but I don't think that works for Chopin. "Chopin realized his music would be interpreted and re-interpreted. All composers realize this" is stating the obvious, but all composers have a concept about how their music should be performed as well, That's why they put markings in the score. There is also something called "style".
Very interesting and even enlightening. I don't see where Gould contradicts what Eigeldinger reported on p. 42 or anywhere else in his book.
At the outset is "Allegro Maestoso". Usually pianists take the whole movement at breakneck speed so one cannot get a feeling of 'majestic' let alone have time to digest the dense harmony. Chopin's dicturm "to play the bass strictly in rhythm" is usually only given lip service most of the time. Gould actually observes it, probably much closer to Chopin.
Thanks. I didn't say that this was the definitive performance of the b minor sonata. Dinu Lipatti's may qualify for that. But Glenn Gould with all his erudition has something to impart even in a problematic Romantic work such as this (with quite a bit of Bachian counterpoint).
This sonata and the Polonaise Fantasie may have pointed to a new direction in Chopin's work had he lived longer.
From what I understand, Gould didn't really care for Chopin because he felt him too pianistic. If this sonata does represent a new direction for Chopin, perhaps this is why Gould decided it worthy of performance?
To the best of my knowledge, Chopin stopped composing large scale works in 1846, around the time when he heard the new Polish uprising was crushed by the Russian authorities. He was in total despair. Even if he lived longer, I doubt whether he would have composed new works of that scale.
The notes were composed by Chopin but the musical style is not Chopins. Aspects of Chopins musical style regarding musical prosody and declamation and phrasing have been handed down from his pupils and are well documented for example in Eigeldingers book [see pg 42] and many of the chief practical directions to expression which Chopin repeated to his pupils are not followed here. I suppose this is what is meant when some say this is not Chopin.
I love Glenn Gould but this is all wrong. Why did he do this? Surely nobody was twisting his arm to play Chopin? Was he taking the piss on the romantics?
First impression - interesting insights at some levels, and as someone said above, sightreading? Have to thank Glenn Gould for his depreciation of Mozart though - see his essays!
I will always love Glenn Gould for what he has done for us. I don't always enjoy his interpretations, this piece is a case in point, yet I love what he shows us about the piece that we might easily miss when other pianists take it on. Certainly the various versions of this piece by other who really 'do it for me' don't give the insightful reading that Glenn seems to be famous for.
I am with Lukecash on this one. Everyone expects their favorite pieces to live up to the ideal interpretation by X or Y pianist.
Mpakos, I agree with you to a certain extent but this is still VERY musical, it just doesn't have the romantic flair that we're accustomed to. I'm glad Glenn exposed the piece this way, it gives it new depth for me. With that being said, the romantic interpretations will always be played more frequently as they suit my moods better.
such a beautiful MIDI hahahaa
OsoBryanMeBra 1 month ago 2
Veramente geniale mostrare la partitura. E' una gioia per chi conosce la musica seguire Gould sulla partitura. Complimenti!
renato45222 1 month ago 5
Good for n00bs that Gould didn't record Chopin and Liszt works .. he let you some material too express yourself and think you are good on it , cause if you play some Bach you know you suck :D
FabzXII 1 month ago
Comment removed
FabzXII 1 month ago
Comment removed
TomBarrister 2 months ago
I actually like this version a lot more than the faster versions.
forgottenbooks 2 months ago
keren......Ya mesti.CHOPIN paling keren wkwkwkwkwkwkw
vaniajoceline 3 months ago
Can someone explain to me why people think he's making fun of Chopin here?
forgottenbooks 3 months ago 2
the section at 1:42 is hilarious
Spudboy41 3 months ago
@Spudboy41 it isn't hilarious
BasileusR 3 months ago
@BasileusR Right, it's horrible.
Nemesi 3 months ago
Comment removed
Spudboy41 3 months ago
Comment removed
Spudboy41 3 months ago
He's not making fun of anything! He's playing the music Chopin wrote, in his in interpretation...
cfwpiano 3 months ago
I feel like a metronome. :\ But still love him!
tandinatamichael 4 months ago
Certo, non avrebbe vinto nessun concorso pianistico il buon Glenn. Vince nulla. Suona...
mirrors1 4 months ago
Didn't realize this piece had a vocal part!
bho1976 4 months ago 13
I heard that song from Half Life 2
Kennychan222 5 months ago
There is wonderful poise and restraint in this performance compared to which mainstream renditions sound hectic and over-heated. As in many other cases people are doing the mistake of looking for something which the artist does not intend to offer and ignore what he does bring out.
ernent 5 months ago
Always so much controversy over Gould... ALWAYS. Look, Gould wasn't trying to do anything other than play the music how he wanted to hear it. Everything he did was out of his sincere love for music. No one loved hearing the pure clarity of each note more than Gould, and that comes out in everything he's done.
Yoshi5020 5 months ago
I think he's making Chopin ridiculous by doing this, but yes, he's still doing it.
Jarnobh 6 months ago
This is the most ridiculous version of this piece ever recorded. Gould is more accurate than a MIDI card on a computer. Having said that, this is the only pianist I have ever heard who plays the central development section correctly. Other pianists play it in a frenzy with fits and starts. I don't think that's correct. I think Glenn Gould got it right.
obdeniye 6 months ago
It's wrong this way to play Chopin, it isn't Bach dear Gould!
qdoihfsalkfjh 7 months ago
@qdoihfsalkfjh
I suspect Chopin would be the last to say which is the wrong way to play his music: when a composer publishes a work, he's letting the world try different ways of performing it. Gould's tempo doesn't violate the indication of "Allegro maestoso". The performance is supremely musical and makes sense. This would be especially obvious to a music lover who hasn't heard this piece before.
kingfaicl 3 months ago
@kingfaicl No. There're things written on the score that must be respected. Legatos, phrasings, themes, it isn't just the tempo that he isn't following. He's just playing notes, but he isn't playing what is written.
Nemesi 3 months ago
@Nemesi
Right.
And?
He gave us 10 minutes of very interesting music.
canpacor 3 months ago
@canpacor If you find this interesting, good for you then
Nemesi 3 months ago
@Nemesi
If you don't find it interesting, then great for you.
mahler151 1 month ago
Jesus!... Partisanship, aside from slowly fucking our political systems, is now ruining our music as well? "Chopin rejected Bach/Chopin loved Bach, wanted everything played like Bach"... ever consider that both may be in some way true? Nah, lets just pick sides; with us or against us... who's first?!
RH98 7 months ago
development section beats everything, especially from 4:57 to 5:24. Chopin should have called it his "Dissonant" Sonata. He was so ahead of his time!
308813062 7 months ago
@308813062
Hey I just noticed your comment on the development section after I wrote my comment about the development section. (see above).
obdeniye 6 months ago
Oy Vey Maria
Bruce88keys 8 months ago
Gould playing Chopin = bach on drugs
mezcalineboy 10 months ago
A great and deep Chopin study... People tend to like the nearest possible version of sonatas, etudes or whatever. We should accept interprets as what they are, interprets. We all knew Gould would play that sonata like this. Does it make it worse than the original version ?
maxdesp 11 months ago
For all the haters, have you actually tried LISTENING? It doesn't sound like a fugue. It sounds Romantic, and it sounds amazing. Give credit where credit is due; Gould turns this into a masterful session.
bugsfan 11 months ago
I guess to add to the random issues of 'facts' and apparent knowing and opinions whether or not Gould is playing this to make fun or is generally taking into consideration respect for the music... consider chopin greatly admired Bach, think how chopin might have played his own works.... in a way this is how I would imagine it to be. The "idea" of chopin, when I hear people play chopin is like whishy washy emotional turn arounds.... This is how I think he would have played it.. maybe close.
TheSingingCello 11 months ago
@andrewfinch1: Actually, it's not nonsense. Haydn was a great exponent of it and he passed it's elements on to Beethoven. Beethoven, as we know embodied both classical and romantic elements through out the the three phases of his musical development. Just because you are not able to see the connection immediately does not mean you should label it as nonsense.
Chopin1974l 11 months ago
@fbager: Great nationalism, folkloric melodies and such prevailed, and although Bach's music is profoundly beautiful, especially the Goldberg variations(which I have played many times), it is quite simply not romantic. Yes, there are romantic elements, but it is NOT romantic. You clearly are not able to define the parameters between good baroque playing and good romantic playing. Gould simply was not a good Chopin performer.
Chopin1974l 1 year ago
@fbager: You clearly have little or no understanding of the romantic era. Furthermore, if you knew anything about Gould, you would know that he very much disliked Chopin, as well he disliked Mozart. Gould admitted so in many interviews. Chopin did not "convince him." The romantic era is best personified in the words of Byronic literature or indeed the sturm und drang movement in Germany.
Chopin1974l 1 year ago
@Chopin1974 Nonsense. Sturm und Drang in music has little to do with musical Romanticism, though it may have prefigured it. It was a brief period, and it is associated with late Rococo and early Classical composers. The romantic era is NOT best personified, indeed or otherwise, by the Sturm und Drang movement in Germany.
That said, this is a silly performance, and is designed to show that giving equal prominence to the voices tears the music apart.
AndrewFinch1 11 months ago
he knew that that was not the correct way to play chopin.
i think he just hated chopin's works.
fuckshitass911 1 year ago
Gould had a problem with his hearing (singing) with his hands (hot water) with his build (low chair) with his emotions (grimaces). etcetcetcetc.
StephenChin1 1 year ago
Allegro maestoso, Glenn, Al-le-gro...
His choice of tempo has absolutely nothing to do with his bias for 'musical structure' or 'contrapuntal approach'. It is just plain wrong for reasons too obvious to mention.
konigstephan 1 year ago
awful. nothing else to say. it was better for Gould to play only Bach and Hindemith
Rinhos 1 year ago
While I prefer other interpretations, this one is fascinating. I wouldn't say it lacks emotion; I would just say it lacks (probably by design) an affinity with how the piece was intended to be played. The adherence to tempo and almost complete lack of rubatto, the emphasis on clarity of voices and counterpoint instead of the fluidity of the overall sound - it's a style that's perfectly suited to Bach, but not at all for Chopin, though it is very interesting to hear.
thinkpad20 1 year ago
@thinkpad20 Ya I think Gould was mostly interested in the structure of music...in the sense that the deep attention to structure in contrapuntal music was an incredibly profound statement that people should pay attention to. My feeling about this recoding I can sum up in a few words: it doesn't really sound "unromantic" the passion in the playing is evident. For me, I find the incredible tension and release to be more romantic than the shaky rubato from many recordings.
Cancrizans 1 year ago
@thinkpad20 Chopin was also a very structural composer. What do we really mean when we talk about a "classical" composer and a "romantic" or "post romantic" composer or any of this. This is mostly babble from "critics" who spend their lives categorizing something that cannot be categorized. If you look at the way Chopin notated his scores, he most certainly places each voice distinctly, when he doesn't. it isn't much different from a baroque composer shortly notating an acceptable convention?
Cancrizans 1 year ago
IDK, I really try to hear a lack of passion in this recording but I haven't figured it out yet. There is so much intensity in the way the notes are held and released, the phrasing...I know I'm not crazy...I think the problem a lot of people have with Gould is that he keeps a regular rhythm, which in the romantic repertoire is unusual, but within that there to me is a lot more passion and meaning than just spewing random emotion about the keyboard as is custom with "romantic" music.
Cancrizans 1 year ago
@Cancrizans
notice that he didn't use rubato at all. he played it like bach's fugue.
and the volume is either 'forte' or 'piano'. no subtle change in volume.
jesus.
fuckshitass911 1 year ago
You know, I wonder if some of the negativity concerning this recording isn't due to the sound on Youtube. If you can get "Glenn Gould plays Romantics 1" I think that's the compilation it is on currently. I actually had it on cassette version along with the set that had all the 20th century stuff on it, anyway, the mp3 is incredibly more rich and nuanced, it reveals the INTENSE emotion in this recording. I guess if your idea of emotion is lots of random rubato...
Cancrizans 1 year ago
yeah not much emotion
cedricrlongreen 1 year ago
I like this rendition. Total clarity. I never liked this sonata but enjoyed this.
TokyoDoggyDog 1 year ago
It would be funny if someone actually put up a 'midi performance' of a piece of music and tried to pass it off as Gould's. It would be interesting to hear people defending the authority of Gould's interpretation. Gould is my favourite pianist by the way.
steamednotfried 1 year ago 2
@steamednotfried Ya I don't think anyone who has listened to even one Gould recording would think his playing is MIDI like. I almost find it bizarre that so many people seem to find this playing not "emotional". I wonder if it is because he chooses a very regular rhythm overall, or more likely, because he doesn't get "mad violent on teh keys" or some other thing people expect to hear. There is tons of musically relevant emotion in every measure so idk what fault lies in this recording. : /
Cancrizans 1 year ago
I firmly believe and infer that Gould was satiring this piece and Romanticism in general.
PancakesoftheLove 1 year ago
Anyone can just "play" this piece like it says on the paper, but it takes a real genius (like Glenn Gould) to give it a uniqueness and allow it to be "expressive". I've got one good reason of his genius, which will prove to all of you who think otherwise that he is one: decades later, and we still debate his performances (just like we still debate Mozart and Beethoven and Chopin) that is what makes him a true genius, and indeed an artist.
Thank you for reading; thumbs up = if you love art
449944991 1 year ago 12
@449944991 beautifully said. I love this piece.
phionaemc2 3 months ago
Listen to Nelson freire's version of this. The best I ve heard.
pianistlover2008 1 year ago
He doesnt make te music sound romantic at all.This piece is beautifu,l but played like this is like my computer program for midis. Gould is a genius no doubt, but for mozart, bach, any barroque composer........never Chopin. My opinion.
pianistlover2008 1 year ago
Gould wasn't too fond of Romantic era works. That may be why this isnt the best preformance >.>
openmindspace 1 year ago
Simply ridiculous. Except for his 1955 Goldberg Variations, the guy's a clown. Nuff said.
konigstephan 1 year ago
If you are bashing the way this piece is played, you do not know Glenn Gould.
He was a genius. You are not.
Revolutionidea 1 year ago
Comment removed
Revolutionidea 1 year ago
Comment removed
Revolutionidea 1 year ago
my compliments to odoenov who had the patience to make this video
newFranzFerencLiszt 1 year ago
A most refreshing performance!
gerardbedecarter 1 year ago
I think he misread the composers name as Bach rather than Chopin
Martel211996 1 year ago
absolutely not chopin. I couldnt listen to it all.
newgeorge 1 year ago
So sentimental and delicated! Its hard to play this piece without runing as a lot of musicians ! It is different but different does not mean bad, just different.
MrIgorzaumm 1 year ago
This would've made Chopin smile, if he had a good sense of humor.
rsdmse 1 year ago
I couldn't listen to the end. Its as though he dropped this impressionistic piece into a vat of cleaning fluid and washed away all the color. His version of the Beethoven Appassionata Sonata has the same quality, lots os sonata but no passion. It is a pointless performance. Its not that I don't like him, I think his Bach, for example, is incredible.
ttellerx 1 year ago 2
Esecuzione poco chopiniana ma.........assolutamente GENIALE!!!!!!il grande Glenn ha finalmente liberato questo straordinario pezzo da quegli eccessivi sentimentalismi ke ne turbano la purezza........
Hyrene92 1 year ago
@Hyrene92 ti quoto ma piu' che sentimentalismi direi manierismi pianistici ,si e' resa con nitidezza e un senso di delicatezza e intensita' incredibile direi timidamente chopin:) piu' vero .
71lupenzo710 1 year ago
I didn't know Gould ever recorded Chopin...
mahler151 1 year ago
@mahler151 and he made the rigth thing
TheGaetano62 1 year ago
@TheGaetano62 You can say that again, this recording is superb!
mahler151 1 year ago
@mahler151 I agree, on Wikipedia it says the following:
"He [Gould] was extremely critical of Frédéric Chopin. In a radio interview, when asked if he didn't find himself wanting to play Chopin, he replied: "No, I don't. I play it in a weak moment — maybe once a year or twice a year for myself. But it doesn't convince me.""
yoss1983 1 year ago
@yoss1983 It's a shame how critical Gould was of most Romantic era composers, there are so many pieces I like that I want to hear him play!
One good thing to come of Gould's strong held opinions is the tolerance and eventual adoration I developed for 12-tone music.
mahler151 1 year ago
Tempos incohérents, ça ce veut une caricature des mauvais interprètes de Chopin, ce n'est qu'une pitoyable interprétation du premier mouvement de la troisième sonate. Mais Chopin se venge et c'est le p'tit Gould qui sort ridicule de l'exercice : il a mis un nez rouge qu'il ne peut pas retirer... car quand il oublie son projet, d'un coup cela devient pas mauvais... vers 2'30 et suivantes...
pianotonton 1 year ago
very beautiful
gimichi 1 year ago
Interpretation nazis saying there is only one way of playing Chopin :) Come on... I welcome every interpretation. The more variety, the better. Every human being sees things differently. It's much more valuable than everyone copying everyone else. All Chopin stuff is EXACTLY the same always.
entelekhia 1 year ago
You have to laugh. I love Gould. He was such a brilliant whack job. His pianism, however, leaves much to be desired and even in Bach. He did much, nevertheless, to bring classical music to the forefront, especially Bach. I love Martha Argerich's recording of the c minor Partita but when I listen to her I miss Gould's singing. I really do............. :)
TJFNYC212 1 year ago
@TJFNYC212 His Bach is my favorite, so I have to disagree with you there.
Kefienzel 1 year ago
I think this is hilarious.
FaygoAddict 1 year ago
It's typical Gould. In otherwords if it's not Bach, it's not worth listening to. His interpretations of Beethoven and Chopin are both bland and inane. There is no musical expression. Phrasing is completely ignored as are tempi and dynamics. This is romantic music at it's best and he has reduced it to a cacophony of clanging notes. Very poor indeed, and not well played!
Chopin1976l 1 year ago
@Chopin1976l I agree,this is terrible.I don't know why he wasted his time playing music which he obviously didn't have any feeling for. However,Gould is good in composers other than Bach-eg.Haydn,Sweenlink,Berg,Strauss,Sibelius,Schoenberg and Wagner (Mastersingers overture)
japanesesweet 1 year ago
@Chopin1976l I admit that he may not have respected all dynamic markings etc but to me it sounds wonderful and fresh, profoundly un-bland. Although Gould's approach may go against the accepted tradition of Chopin playing, one must not forget that this percieved 'tradition', this accepted 'way' of playing 'romantic' music is very subjective. To dismiss this as 'Chopin badly played, as if it were Bach' infers a misunderstanding of Bach, Chopin and Gould and a simplistic notion of romanticism.
fbager 1 year ago
He's making fun.
LawrenceGFoster 1 year ago 12
this is not bach my friend.....you played bach excellent but chopin.....
thesortsakis 1 year ago
@thesortsakis his Bach is much weirder ... but you still like it
reinpost 1 year ago
@thesortsakis this kind of playing suits to bach but not in chopin.is tottaly bland!
thesortsakis 1 year ago
wait a minute, this isnt a midi. Holy crap its a person. wow its so......bland.
phantom402 1 year ago
maybe his approach to romantic pieces is quite unusual but I can´t see why we should not give him the credit he had earned during his long and succesful carreer
elaleph100 1 year ago
So Lovely. I love hearing the variety of interpretations. While I can't say this sounds specificially like Glen, it has what it takes to endear this gem to me once again. It is a beautiful here. Thank you.
TheOtherMusicMan 1 year ago
I have heard a ton of complaints about this interpretation, however to me it is one of the most rapturous interpretation I have heard. I could very well imagine people having diffences with it, but saying is it midi like only marks you as a bad listener and makes no comment on the interpretation at all.
Cancrizans 1 year ago
Sorry Chopin, you get to sound like Bach... plus moaning.
some1namedjeff 1 year ago 3
this rendition is both amazing and hilarious
demonninjaspider 1 year ago 24
@demonninjaspider everything he did was amazing and hilarious
msa1985 8 months ago 2
Wow. I forgot how beautiful Gould plays this piece. The counterpoint is played with such clarity and emotion. i never heard so many of the notes that Chopin actually wrote in this piece. What a different effect.
citzie 1 year ago
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Gould a critic of Chopin's music? I find it a chopin piece interpreted by Gould very interesting.
alejogj2 1 year ago
This is great! The piece is shown in a completely different light and played by a complete master of the instrument. It offer's the listener so much insight into the finer points music. So interesting!
bfdpowers 1 year ago
@bfdpowers I completely agree. :)
ScutigerousPume 1 year ago
Of course, this is not a typical Chopin rendition, but i'm enjoying listen it. Gould shows the polyphonic structure of 1st movement and does it with dense emotional feeling, although he didn't like Chopin.
VerryTemporaryLogin 1 year ago
VerryTemporaryLogin: I agree with you about the "dense" part, but not the emotional feeling part. Call me a "Gould Skeptic" as opposed to a "Gould Worshiper"--it seems that when it comes to opinions about Gould's playing there is little middle ground. Who was the greatest pianist of all time? Some might opine Liszt (no recordings to verify), Hofmann, Rachmaninov, Richter, Horowitz. I think there have been many great pianists (such as those I mentioned), but no "greatest of all time".
soami2u 1 year ago
@VerryTemporaryLogin
"enjoying listen it"?
...
newFranzFerencLiszt 1 year ago
Gould has earned the right to play music however he wanted to. If you don't like it, don't listen to it.
VerryTemporaryLogin 1 year ago
"If you don't like it, don't listen to it". Gould was a very complicated artist (all geniuses are complicated). Because geniuses are endlessly fascinating they will always be endlessly analyzed, uncovering imperfections amidst the brilliance. Surely Gould deserves more than such a simplistic throwaway.
soami2u 1 year ago
@soami2u I think you didn't quite understand my idea. I'm saying "don't listen if you don't like" because he was a genius and he could play the way he wanted. And peole now criticize him forgetting who he was. To me, he's the greatest pianist of all time.
VerryTemporaryLogin 1 year ago
And how are you supposed to know whether you like it or not if you don't listen to it?
Schamschi 1 year ago
Gould advocated a performer should never outshine the music itself... maybe this performance just reveals what this movement really is without all the acrobatics added by other pianists: a dull boring piece of music. His recording of the fourth movement of this sonata rocks in my opinion, though!
fernandofariajunior 1 year ago
I 100% agree with you
And that's why he stuck with Bach and Beethoven
I love Chopin though
sagosoosmar 1 year ago
Gould wasn't a pianist....
.... he was a conductor....
this recording and the Bach's ones are the proofs.
I don't know because he wanted to "maltreat" this beautiful music, while he was probably knowing it.....
DEEZA95 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Please stop commenting on GG's interpretation of Chopin's Sonata. Obviously it's not a "orthodox" interpretation and he perfectly knew it. Simply the radio producer told him «Glenn why don't you try with Chopin?» and he simply accepted the challenge. That's all. So, please, stop discussing on "maestoso" and "pesante"... Thanks.
Matteo7419 1 year ago
This forum exists to enable listeners to discuss whatever they feel is relevant to the recording. You are wasting your time if you think you can tell people to "stop commenting on GG's interpretation of Chopin's Sonata". Maestoso vs. pesante or GG's hair style--everyone is free to comment on GG here, and comments can range from the ridiculous to the sublime (just like GG's playing). Take your Stalinism somewhere else. Thanks.
soami2u 1 year ago 4
Of course I agree with you. I'll keep my stalinism out just for not beeing forced to discuss about your stupidity too.
Matteo7419 1 year ago
Matteo7419: I never tried to force you "to discuss about [my] stupidity", merely to help you to understand that there is such a thing as ideas, or call it diversity of opinion.
soami2u 1 year ago
My dear friend, I don't need your help to understand that we all think different. Thanks, by the way. I omly told that in THIS particular case, about THIS particular piece, it's totally crazy to discuss about the difference between "moderato" and "pesante", just because the same GG told this was a challenge and he did'nt like the music of FC and it makes no sense to search for an "autenticity" in GG's playing of this music.
Matteo7419 1 year ago
Pay attention, Matteo7419, no one ever mentioned the word "moderato"; and it was always obvious from the beginning that GG disliked the music of Chopin (anyone can tell from this recording that he didn't identify with his music the same way he did with Bach's). That doesn't prelude criticism of GG's musicianship here...a consummate musician and pianist should be able to shift gears between different styles of music, and as exemplified here, that GG was unable to do. He didn't "get it"--like you.
soami2u 1 year ago
It was "maestoso", sorry. Yeah, I have my own style :-) Gorgeous. Bye.
Matteo7419 1 year ago
@soami2u: No, you don't get it. The point is, it's pointless to accuse Gould of playing this piece not like Chopin wanted it, because this was exactly Gould's intention. Or do you think Gould was too stupid to tell the difference between cresc. and decresc. and therefore plays decres. where Chopin writes cres.? It was Gould's idea of music making to "recreate a work" and "turn performance into composition". Get some information on Gould before you waste your time writing pointless comments here.
Schamschi 1 year ago
@Schamschi: don't waste YOUR time writing pointless comments here. It is the height of arrogance to "turn performance into composition". The composition belongs to CHOPIN, not Glenn Gould. You can make excuses for Gould's performance here until the cows come home, but it's pretty elementary that a good performer follows the COMPOSER'S intentions. Gould never "got it" and neither do you.
soami2u 1 year ago
If you think Gould is arrogant, that's your problem. It can be solved, however, by watching the video v=M6Zc7P6NsZ8, where Gould explains his view on performance (provided, of course, that you "get it"). If you think I'm trying to make excuses for Gould, that's also your problem, because I only wanted to point out that your attempts to discredit Gould by trying to prove he is not following Chopin's directions are in vain, because he didn't intend to follow Chopin's directions in the first place.
Schamschi 1 year ago
"It's [my] problem". No, Schamschi, I don't think so. I think your attitude is as arrogant as Gould's. Any good musician follows the composer's intentions. It's pretty basic. Don't accuse ME of not "getting it". I guess you don't like Chopin any more than Gould did (yes, it IS the point).
soami2u 1 year ago
You guessed wrong, I like Chopin. You think any good musician follows the composer's intentions? Well, Gould thought differently, and he, unlike you, had concrete arguments for his opinion. You think I'm as arrogant as Gould? Based on what? I never supported Gould's opinion, neither did I say anything against it, I just tried to explain it to you, because you obviously hadn't got it (and probably still don't get it, seeing as you still think Gould was arrogant - have you even watched the video?)
Schamschi 1 year ago
If anything can be said against Gould, it is the fact that if one doesn't know these things about Gould and his view on performance, and expects, as in this case, the Chopin b minor Sonata, one could indeed feel insulted and deceived, because Gould presents this as Chopin's Sonata, while he actually delivers something different, a "recreation", as he himself puts it, because, even while the notes are by Chopin, the expression isn't. But once you accept that, I think one can appreciate Gould.
Schamschi 1 year ago
And this is probably exactly what motivated Leonard Bernstein to give an introductory speech at the infamous concert where he conducted Brahms' 1st Piano Concerto with Gould as the soloist. Pity the people didn't seem to understand it - or shall I say, to "get it"...
Schamschi 1 year ago
Schamschi: yes, Gould was unconventional, to say the least. The man was probably mentally ill, for one thing. If you know anything about GG you already know he may have suffered from a form of high-functioning autism and possibly even schizophrenia. Thus his view of things (musically and otherwise) could come across (to many) as rather twisted. I can hear it in this performance. But you are one of the chosen few who "gets it"? And you like Chopin?
soami2u 1 year ago
Well, I don't like Chopin, I LOVE Chopin. And I don't like hearing his works butchered. This performance of Gould's can by no stretch of the imagination be what Chopin intended. Concrete arguments? I think you project. It's less complicated than you think. Yes, I DO think any good musician follows the composer's intentions. Almost everyone agrees GG could be effective in Bach. But not in Mozart or Chopin. Your idea of "not getting it" seems to me more like a difference of opinion.
soami2u 1 year ago
I've always felt that people who think about music the way you do need to compile some sort of authoritative text dictating the rules of music, commandments so to speak, then demand that everyone adhere to them or they'll be stoned to death or something.
Personally I find this music bland and lifeless--played by Gould or anyone else.
I find Chopin's 2nd sonata especially the first movement to be far superior to this piece.
EMPERORMIKI 1 year ago
Dear Emperormiki: "People who think about music the way [I] do"--I plead not guilty! I merely ask that performers consider something called "style"! As to Chopin's 3rd Sonata being "bland and lifeless" in the first mvmt, I think you need to get to know it better! Also, listen to some GREAT performances of the work: Cortot, Novaes and Lipatti (the 3 GREATEST IMO!) I agree that the 1st mvmt of the 2nd sonata is colossal! But I think the later 3rd is a masterpiece too--if more diffuse structurally.
soami2u 1 year ago
(@ Emperormiki, cont'd): some other great ones: a rare 1935 recording by Hofmann, and a 1964 one by Vlado Perlemuter. Also, many admire the early '50s recording by William Kapell (which I haven't heard). When you hear it played well instead of badly (as here by Glenn Gould), I think you'll like the piece better! :)
soami2u 1 year ago
Actually I have heard it played by many pianists and although my feelings toward it has obviously changed somewhat over the years (I first began listening intently to "serious" music as a kid) my opinion essentially remained the same about this particular movement.
I find it completely bland and lacking life—thats just my own personal opinion.
My favorite composer, aside from Beethoven, is Ives. I find his music startlingly beautiful for several reasons. I think Ives > Chopin.
EMPERORMIKI 1 year ago
Emperormiki: I certainly respect your opinion, but to me saying that Ives is greater than Chopin is a little like saying apples are better than zucchini!
soami2u 1 year ago
Apples are not zucchinis—Chopin is no Ives.
EMPERORMIKI 1 year ago
That's what I meant!
soami2u 1 year ago
Glad you agree.
EMPERORMIKI 1 year ago
I agree in the sense that Ives' music is DIFFERENT from that of Chopin, but not better...how could you in any real sense say that Shostakovich's music is better than Schubert's?
soami2u 1 year ago
Actually you can say Ives is better than Chopin or Chopin is better than Ives all you want as that is merely an opinion (as is all music theory)—what you can't say is that Ives is more correct than Chopin.
Same goes for performances.
EMPERORMIKI 1 year ago
Perhaps here is where we differ. I think there ARE performances that are more "correct" in the sense that they are more in keeping with what the composer intended--not necessarily "conventional", just stylistically more appropriate (one wouldn't play Beethoven the same way as Debussy!) The Gould performance of the Chopin #3 1st mvmt is to me an example of a performance that is just ALL WRONG in this sense.
soami2u 1 year ago 2
This man has a unique way of playing Classical-Romantic period.
jasonextreme 1 year ago
I'll say it again: Gould's interpretation is "Allegro pesante", not "Allegro maestoso". Far from what Chopin intended.
soami2u 2 years ago 4
Pesante and Masesto are arguably, very similar. Secondly, if chopin had a worry about tempo I am sure he owned a clock in which to give a very speciffic tempo for the piece. Lastly of course, chopin was an artist, Gould is an artist. Chopin realized his music would be interpreted and re-interpreted. All composers realize this.
KindFurryBoy 1 year ago
"Pesante" and "Maestoso" might be arguably very similar if it's one of Elgar's Coronation Marches, but I don't think that works for Chopin. "Chopin realized his music would be interpreted and re-interpreted. All composers realize this" is stating the obvious, but all composers have a concept about how their music should be performed as well, That's why they put markings in the score. There is also something called "style".
soami2u 1 year ago
Sometimes I wonder whether Gould would also play a decrescendo at a certain passage if the score didn't explicitly say crescendo.
Schamschi 2 years ago
thanks for putting up the music
munkybrain 2 years ago
Too slow and heavy. Uchida's is the best for me.
GRKFFS 2 years ago
como diria MAradona... Chupenla!
leagamallo 2 years ago
WTF?? Play like Chopin want´s it, not like a midi. Bad, really bad!
Pian0O0 2 years ago 24
cool story hansel
psbjr 2 years ago
@Pian0O0 hahahahahah
newFranzFerencLiszt 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Pian0O0 what the fuck are you saying!??!?!?!
newFranzFerencLiszt 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's fascinating to hear Gould's incredibly insightful approach to the music, Please post the middle movements too. Thanx.
stlivermore 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Very interesting and even enlightening. I don't see where Gould contradicts what Eigeldinger reported on p. 42 or anywhere else in his book.
At the outset is "Allegro Maestoso". Usually pianists take the whole movement at breakneck speed so one cannot get a feeling of 'majestic' let alone have time to digest the dense harmony. Chopin's dicturm "to play the bass strictly in rhythm" is usually only given lip service most of the time. Gould actually observes it, probably much closer to Chopin.
zamyrabyrd 2 years ago
Gould's interpretation is "Allegro pesante", not "Allegro maestoso".
soami2u 2 years ago 21
@soami2u Perfect notice
ShukriKorkis 1 year ago
Who is thumbing your perfectly reasonable comment down?
MEpianist 2 years ago
Thanks. I didn't say that this was the definitive performance of the b minor sonata. Dinu Lipatti's may qualify for that. But Glenn Gould with all his erudition has something to impart even in a problematic Romantic work such as this (with quite a bit of Bachian counterpoint).
This sonata and the Polonaise Fantasie may have pointed to a new direction in Chopin's work had he lived longer.
zamyrabyrd 2 years ago
From what I understand, Gould didn't really care for Chopin because he felt him too pianistic. If this sonata does represent a new direction for Chopin, perhaps this is why Gould decided it worthy of performance?
Scarlatti2007 2 years ago
To the best of my knowledge, Chopin stopped composing large scale works in 1846, around the time when he heard the new Polish uprising was crushed by the Russian authorities. He was in total despair. Even if he lived longer, I doubt whether he would have composed new works of that scale.
chopinandliszt 2 years ago
The notes were composed by Chopin but the musical style is not Chopins. Aspects of Chopins musical style regarding musical prosody and declamation and phrasing have been handed down from his pupils and are well documented for example in Eigeldingers book [see pg 42] and many of the chief practical directions to expression which Chopin repeated to his pupils are not followed here. I suppose this is what is meant when some say this is not Chopin.
1sun1moon1 2 years ago
Comment removed
1sun1moon1 2 years ago
i know that he didnt accept chopin like a composer
Sashomei 2 years ago
where r his mistakes?
Sashomei 2 years ago
It's almost like a midi file,
pretty cool,
but .. not chopin.
ArvindanT 2 years ago
Not what people have come to expect Chopin to be you mean.
The notes are Chopin—and that is the extent of Chopin as far as we are concerned.
This is Chopin.
EMPERORMIKI 2 years ago
I love Glenn Gould but this is all wrong. Why did he do this? Surely nobody was twisting his arm to play Chopin? Was he taking the piss on the romantics?
dinastein44 2 years ago
First impression - interesting insights at some levels, and as someone said above, sightreading? Have to thank Glenn Gould for his depreciation of Mozart though - see his essays!
VivaRenata 2 years ago
Comment removed
owatson322utube 2 years ago
I will always love Glenn Gould for what he has done for us. I don't always enjoy his interpretations, this piece is a case in point, yet I love what he shows us about the piece that we might easily miss when other pianists take it on. Certainly the various versions of this piece by other who really 'do it for me' don't give the insightful reading that Glenn seems to be famous for.
Vsyevolod 2 years ago
I thought that Glenn Gould was widely known to have despised Chopin? Is this really him? It's awful.
jezmuff 2 years ago 8
yes this is him. he played it during one of his canadian television shows i believe. not an official recording
MichaelDLC 2 years ago
This horrible. Really autistic playing
scotty123123 2 years ago 9
Agreed! You might say autistic, rather than artistic!
soami2u 2 years ago 2
I am with Lukecash on this one. Everyone expects their favorite pieces to live up to the ideal interpretation by X or Y pianist.
Mpakos, I agree with you to a certain extent but this is still VERY musical, it just doesn't have the romantic flair that we're accustomed to. I'm glad Glenn exposed the piece this way, it gives it new depth for me. With that being said, the romantic interpretations will always be played more frequently as they suit my moods better.
KeithWhalen11 2 years ago
Sounds like he is sight reading it which he probably was!
sll10 2 years ago 2