Cortot - Chopin Nocturne No. 2 in E flat major, Op.9 No.2

Cortot - Chopin Nocturne No. 2 in E flat major, Op.9 No.2

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Cortot
• Chopin
• Nocturne
• No.
• in
• flat
• major
• Op.9
• No.2

[djehoti]

WOW! I'm not sure but I think I've listened to just about every YT video of this piece and this is the best. I'ts like he plays it like my soul wants to hear it.

[petrof4056]

so musician, surnatural! my brother's godfather was an Alfred Cortot assistant, for him he was not human. what a touch!

[JulianoAlberto2005]

Thumbs up if Dexter brought you here!

[oneginee]

Rachmaninoff got the aristocratic side of chopin but with more abandon, the hidden messages behind the somptuous melodic line. Cortot's piano playing sounds more beautiful pleasing to the soul. Both of them the best Chopin interpreter.

[svendiamond]

wow I keep seeing all these comments about how this guy is the "best" at interpreting Chopin and I'd have to agree. He let's the tempo slow down and speed up just right... it's crazy!

[beeteep60]

@fledgehog i agree but there not in any kind of order based on there playing just the ones i think play it well

[fledgehog]

@beeteep60 rachmaninoff should be higher on that list -- his interpretation is genius. and it is true that no modern-day pianist can compare with the soul of those older pianists who still had true romantic roots.

[DevilsInstrument]

@T3hL337Sesshy I could have phrased that clearer, sorry. I meant actually providing solid reasons for calling him that rather than just saying "I think he's pretentious", as you have done so far. I just think 'pretentious' is, well...kind of a pretentious word to use here. 'Saccharine', 'maudlin', OK. 'Pretentious'? What does that even mean applied to music?

Better recordings? Etudes 1933/34, Preludes, Ballade No.4, Barcarolle, Debussy Preludes, anything by Ravel or Beethoven (try Op.109).

[T3hL337Sesshy]

@DevilsInstrument So let me get this straight... you asked me to explain why I think he's pretentious... and you'd like me to do that without calling him pretentious. This debate has devolved into nonsense already. I have not yet gone so far as to dismiss all of his playing as such, no, but this particular recording has left enough of an impression on me that I would be heavily biased towards doing so upon further listening. Perhaps you could direct me to a more accessible recording.

[DevilsInstrument]

@T3hL337Sesshy Perhaps an answer that didn't rely so much on calling him pretentious? It is obvious that I will convince you nothing; however, lest you go so far as to dismiss all of Cortot's playing as 'saccharine', I should remind you that he's considered by many to be the greatest interpreter of Chopin ever for a reason. This is far from the best recording he ever made. But the same expressive freedom you dismiss is what gives him his enormous, nearly unrivaled power over music.

[T3hL337Sesshy]

@DevilsInstrument Are you really trying to debate me about my own opinion, or are you so mystified as to how anybody could possibly dislike this recording? And refer to my reply to my own response for the rest of my explanation. I don't know what kind of answer would satisfy you, though; shall I say "because this note here is played relative to that note there with this specific velocity and that interval of time, that's why he's pretentious"?

[T3hL337Sesshy]

@T3hL337Sesshy As to exactly how I feel it's pretentious, I don't know if I really feel like attempting to explain a very subjective observation in objective terms. His interpretation lacks subtlety and modesty as it sounds to me, let's say. It's saccharine, maudlin. As much as he completely ignores Chopin's particular disdain for an exaggerated rubato, he doesn't seem to "get" the composer well enough to bring out the true beauty of the piece.