That is a nice recording. Well these things really come down to personal taste. I really like the harpsichord myself, but I would suggest you check out Schiff's recordings of Bach and Angela Hewitt's recordings of F. Couperin's music.

 

I just don't know much about the various types of harpsichords. I don't like the bright sounding instruments. I really like the ones I've heard that have more of a mellow gut string type of sound.

 

This is nice too.

 

For Bach I would recommend Gould, Tureck, Woodward, Rubsam and Koroliov. The only Handel I've found excellent on piano comes from Richter. For Scarlatti, I'd go with Sudbin.

 

Not a fan of Rübsam personally - I find he pulls the music around far too much for my taste. Agree otherwise, though Gould can be an acquired taste, especially for those who might find his vocalisations a problem.

 

I ordered the cheapo Documents label box set of Marcelle Meyer (17 CDs) for 20 bucks. Her playing blows me away! They are old mono recordings, but the music is so good it doesn't matter. And she plays everything form Scarlatti to Stravinsky.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00PD476SM/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=

 

I should buy that, too--especially since a lot of my favorite recordings by her have disappeared from Youtube. But keep an eye out for remasters as well.

A brilliant pianist, to be sure.

 

I also ordered some Bach by Gould. The Inventions, and Toccatas. A 3 disc set for 7 dollars. And there's a 4 disc set of the suites for around 9 dollars. I've never listened to Perahia. I've heard some Schiff, but he sounds too mannered and polite for my taste.

 

Daniel Ben Piennar's Gibbons
Francesco Tristano Schlime's Frescobaldi and Buxtehude
Eric Heidsieck's Handel

The Gibbons is the best of these IMO.

 

For a different view of Bach, try Samuil Feinberg's Well-Tempered Clavier - Bach as seen through Chopin. I wouldn't want it to be my only WTC, but there's a real intelligence behind his interpretation.

Note - this is a Russian recording from around 1960, and availability of a decent mastering is a hit or miss proposition. The best mastering I've heard that is readily available is the one on Tidal. Another contributor to this forum was kind enough to send me one that I liked.

 

Perahia's Goldberg variations are one of my desert island disks. I like Perahia's other Bach too.

Ivo Pogorelic in Scarlatti is another favorite of mine.

 

Perahia's Goldberg variations are one of my desert island disks. I like Perahia's other Bach too.

Ivo Pogorelic in Scarlatti is another favourite of mine.

It's high on my list as well, however Yevgeny Sudbin is no 1 at the moment.

Details:

http://www.prestoclassical.co.uk/r/BIS/BIS2138

 

I have yet to hear a baroque piece that didn't sound better to me on the piano! I do enjoy well-recorded harpsichord from a purely audiophile perspective, though.

 

I have yet to hear a baroque piece, that didn't sound better to me on the harpsichord. But I do enjoy well-recorded Steinway from a purely audiophile perspective, though.

 

The sound of the harpsichord irritates me. But I love much of baroque music. Therefore all baroque music for harpsichord translates better on piano to my ears. I really like Dinnerstein's recording of the Goldberg Variations and Hewitt's recording of the Well-Temperered Clavier.

 

Good thing you weren't alive in the 1700's. You might have taken arsenic.

 

None of it translates well to the piano. The music sounds best on the instrument it was intended for.

 

I don't believe that. A lot of baroque, and other keyboard music sounds great on guitar, as well as piano.

 

Although I can easily love Bach played on piano, I don't believe there is a single baroque solo keyboard composition that works best on piano. However, it's a good thing that those who find the harpsichord problematic have the trusty piano to maximize their listening pleasure.

 

Although I can easily love Bach played on piano, I don't believe there is a single baroque solo keyboard composition that works best on piano.

Scarlatti K 544 maybe, and possibly k 481.

 

Can we at least agree that the artistry of the performer is more important than the instrument used?

 

I can't. I do not like the sound of the harpsichord and music performed on it loses much of its appeal to me. It's like listening to your favorite aria in Donald Duck's voice.

Now of course the artistry of the performer is hugely important but luckily we have an abundance of superbly talented pianists who choose to play Bach.

 

I enjoy both piano and harpsichord for most Baroque solo keyboard works, for concertos or orchestral music featuring keyboard I think they sound much better with the harpsichord. Frankly I'll never understand some members aversion to the sound of this instrument.

To each their own.

 

To each their own,I second that.

 

Harpsichord, for me (but I listen to a lot of Gould!). Although most Bach transfers quite well to piano, I could never think of playing things like Forqueray on a piano - I would miss the huge, transparent bass of a harpsichord. But surprisingly, Sweelinck does remarkably well!

Most of the time, harpsichords have more "personality," so to say - while most Steinways and Bosens and Yamahas are fashioned more or less alike (I wouldn't be able to tell them apart just by sound on CD), a 1646 Couchet is quite different from a 1700 Grimaldi, which is also very different from a 1734 Vater. I like the variety of shapes and sizes harpsichords comes in, and the corresponding variety of timbres, rather than the "one-size-fits-all" piano.

Some other differences: of course dynamics can't be made on harpsichord, so performers rely on "fluid" phrasing rather than dynamics, and it takes some time for me, someone who grew up listening to early music on harpsichords, to adapt to dynamics rather than rubato on a piano (like the surprise I felt initially when listening to Schiff's Bach on concertzender).

But I like this analogy: imagine a precious piece of artwork - say, the Ghent altarpiece. Playing Bach's partitas on harpsichord is like admiring the altarpiece in situ inside the Gothic church, carved stone sculptures and all - it's the way the builders intended it to be displayed, "in context" with everything else beside it in the church. You might get distracted by everything else, but there's a quaint sort of charm to it, and you're more looking for the overall effect.

Playing Bach's partitas on a piano is like moving it to a nice, whitewashed, glass-encased display gallery (picture not best example). The art is taken out of context and put in a "modern" one, which is significantly less distracting but might miss the overall effect or create a different one (not necessarily bad!).

So, to quote Traverso, "to each their own!"

 

I dislike all baroque keyboard music on piano because to me it sounds horrible.

Strictly a harpsichord guy.

However if someone put a gun to my head, and I had to recommend baroque piano, otherwise I would be killed, I would say the music that sounds least offensive to these ears (still mildly horrible!) would be the Scarlatti Keyboard Sonatas in the right hands, such as the one's that belonged to Horowitz.

Take the gun away and I'm back to preaching that Scarlatti sounds best on harpsichord.

 

I dislike all baroque keyboard music on piano because to me it sounds horrible.

Yes, and note that the initiator of this thread called it:

Baroque keyboard music that translates best on piano.

This word "translates" says it all.

 

The instrument is only a vehicle for musical performance and expression. But I bet if Bach and Scarlatti were alive today and they were given a beautiful Steinway piano, they'd play it a hell of alot more than those 18th century relics.

 

The instrument is only a vehicle for musical performance and expression. But I bet if Bach and Scarlatti were alive today and they were given a beautiful Steinway piano, they'd play it a hell of alot more than those 18th century relics.

Well, what vehicle you choose does matter. Try taking a long trip in this car if you don't think so

 

I really love Igor Levit's Partitas and Goldberg Variations.

 

I can listen to a harpsichord for an hour or two but after a certain point it starts to wear on my ears in a way in which a modern piano does not.

I am also in the group who firmly believes any of the old composers if given a chance would far prefer a modern piano as well. When the Fortepiano came out they ditched the harpsichord and began writing for the new instrument. To me they were very forward thinking people and especially Bach himself was arranging his own works for different instruments so I don't feel he would have had any issue with it.

I do occasionally delve into harpsichord music for a while but I much prefer to listen to a modern piano, especially for long stretches.

 

Richter is my go to for the WTC on the piano. He is miraculous. Lush and full. The piano in bloom. And yet every line is clear, and bell-like.
Amazing.

 

You say the ( absolute) right words.:tiphat:

 

Scarlatti Sonatas probably. But then again I'm spoiled listening to the magician, Vladimir Horowitz.

 

As a matter of fact, I just ordered Horowitz playing 20 Scarlatti Sonatas because I can't find anything by Horowitz/Scarlatti in my house. When I moved, it seems some of my stuff got lost.

Maybe Scarlatti/Horowitz is somewhere up in the attic along with the Mahler Violin Concerto.