Thread: Bartok Piano Concertos 1-3

Anyone heard this recording? It is pretty recently. http://www.amazon.com/Bartok-The-Pia...pr_product_top

I have a great set on Chandos and I like the Argerich/Dutoit renditions. While not my expertise, I also like (which is rare for me to like Vladi) this one:

Is anyone familiar with the Kovacevich/Colin Davis set? That's the one I have, but for some reason, I haven't played it enough to have an opinion on it.

Lots of questions and no answers. I decided to take the plunge. Just ordered this.

Originally Posted by neoshredder

Lots of questions and no answers. I decided to take the plunge. Just ordered this.

Aha! Must be I'm on your Ignore List. Good plan.

Originally Posted by Manxfeeder

Is anyone familiar with the Kovacevich/Colin Davis set? That's the one I have, but for some reason, I haven't played it enough to have an opinion on it.

That's the one I just ordered the other day on a Philips Duo set w/ the 2nd violin concerto.

Originally Posted by Hilltroll72

Kocsis/Fischer is my favorite. Anda/Fricsay is good, mostly because of Fricsay & orchestra. The 1st is very difficult to nail, according to Bartók and to me. The 2nd is marginally less difficult, and maybe the best balanced between percussion and other aspects of music. The 3rd is apparently relatively easy to perform adequately, though the elderly Boulez messes it up.

How exactly does Boulez mess up B3?

Originally Posted by chalkpie

How exactly does Boulez mess up B3?

He does his best to turn all of them into duck soup. The 3rd is most vulnerable to that form of attack.

Originally Posted by Hilltroll72

He does his best to turn all of them into duck soup. The 3rd is most vulnerable to that form of attack.

?

WTF does that mean? I don't follow that metaphor at all, maybe because I have never had duck soup?

Can you elaborate in musical terms? Thanks.

Originally Posted by chalkpie

?

WTF does that mean? I don't follow that metaphor at all, maybe because I have never had duck soup?

Can you elaborate in musical terms? Thanks.

Hmm. You have never heard the term "Easy (or simple) as duck soup"? Whippersnapper perhaps? I can't elaborate 'in musical terms', not possessing any that are applicable (and damned few of any sort).

[edit: To clarify, the old saw about 'duck soup' is that the duck merely wades though the water of it. Boulez's concerti with Zimmerman are heavily 'watered down'.]

I find that I like Bartok better when the performance acknowledges the ethnic roots. When it's presented purely as modern music, I find it very tough going.

Originally Posted by bigshot

I find that I like Bartok better when the performance acknowledges the ethnic roots. When it's presented purely as modern music, I find it very tough going.

Interesting. I hadn't thought on it, but those ethnic roots are significant in some of his music, particularly the solo piano pieces and the string quartets 1-4. They may be too highly integrated to 'show though' in his music from the mid-thirties onward.
What say you?

Am I the only one who thinks that the 1st is very underrated? It's an amazing work, very lively. It has the percussive hit of Les Noces with a more classicizing touch, and I'm surprised that audiences haven't taken to it as much as the latter two (which are excellent as well).

Originally Posted by Mahlerian

Am I the only one who thinks that the 1st is very underrated? It's an amazing work, very lively. It has the percussive hit of Les Noces with a more classicizing touch, and I'm surprised that audiences haven't taken to it as much as the latter two (which are excellent as well).

When Bartók published the 2nd concerto, he wrote that the 1st presented performance difficulties for both soloist and orchestra. He could have included the audience as well. Not only is the piano treated as tuned percussion, orchestral instruments that don't normally sound at all percussive are required to approach that sound. The musicians under Fischer and Lehel managed it well.

I wasn't aware the 1st was under-rated. I consider it one of the finest PC's in the repertoire, though I slightly prefer the 2nd. The 3rd is also great but to my ears is the one not quite as good as the others.

I picked up the Anda/Fricsay recording of the concertos recently, and ended up really enjoying it for reasons I didn't quite expect. Fricsay really brings out a lot of the subtler voices in the score, making them sound almost like new pieces at times compared to what I was used to - the Donohoe/Rattle version. I really enjoy both interpretations for different reasons, the Rattle has very well integrated sound yet with more dynamic contrasts between certain sections, where the Fricsay has stunning detail and great execution instrumentally. Anda's playing strikes me as more emotional than Donohoe's who comes across a little more methodical and exacting. I like both but slightly prefer the softer tone of the piano on the Donohoe/Rattle recording.

Hearing the differences in these two recordings has really piqued my interest in hearing additional recordings of these great, multifaceted and fascinating works.