# Rubenstein's Chopin Waltzes



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

These are a great cycle of the Watlzes. Arthur is a fantastic player. I'm enjoying it now, anyone else enjoy this CD?

:tiphat:


----------



## chu42 (Aug 14, 2018)

Yes, Rubinstein has long been a gold standard for several of the Chopin cycles. Glad you enjoy them!


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Certainly can't go wrong with Rubinstein in anything Chopin, but lately I have been listening to Dinu Lipatti and Claudio Arrau for the Waltzes.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Another great Waltz record is Zoltan Kocsis, who makes some interesting rubato choices


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Triplets said:


> Another great Waltz record is Zol.an Kocsis, who makes some interesting rubato choices


Too fast

cfmjlvdklv nfdklv fdxklv fcdvl n


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Captainnumber36 said:


> These are a great cycle of the Watlzes. Arthur is a fantastic player. I'm enjoying it now, anyone else enjoy this CD?
> 
> :tiphat:


Too aristocratic (assuming you're talking about the post war stuff) The best waltz from him is the op64/2 here, I can't find it on youtube unfortunately.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

The best complete Waltzes release I know is from Arthur Moreira Lima


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

"Aristocratic" is exactly the right word. I hear it as aloof and detached. Lipatti, Arrau, Sofronitsky, even Kocsis are preferable for me.


----------



## howlingfantods (Jul 27, 2015)

I was convinced for many years that I didn't particularly care for Chopin. The only recording I had of his works was the collected Rubinstein (recommended as the top choice in virtually every magazine and record guide) plus a bit of Pollini and Ashkenazy. 

I occasionally listened to Rubinstein's nocturnes when I couldn't fall asleep, because that recording would definitely do the trick. But I never listened to Chopin otherwise. I thought of Chopin the way most detractors do--miniaturist, overly effete and perfumed salon music without much substance.

Imagine my surprise when I started listening to loads of other pianists in this repertoire and found out that I actually love this repertoire in different hands. 

That's not to say that there's anything wrong with the Rubinstein--his recordings don't do much for me but obviously a lot of Chopin lovers swear by his set. But I do think that's often the problem with overwhelming consensus top picks--if a listener don't like that particular recording, it may drive that listener away from that repertoire. I had much the same experience with Solti's Ring keeping me from getting into Wagner for a long time.

As to the waltzes, my favorite set is the Samson Francois--his waltzes really swing. Francois plays them like they're the greatest bar music of all time--his recording always makes me want to be sitting in a french cafe with a bottle of red and a cigarette dangling. Cortot's and Cziffra's are great too. Rachmaninov recorded a bunch of them too, they're superb as is the rest of his recordings of Chopin.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

I grew up with the RCA LP of Rubinstein's Waltzes. It's a sentimental favorite.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

howlingfantods said:


> I was convinced for many years that I didn't particularly care for Chopin. The only recording I had of his works was the collected Rubinstein (recommended as the top choice in virtually every magazine and record guide) plus a bit of Pollini and Ashkenazy.
> 
> I occasionally listened to Rubinstein's nocturnes when I couldn't fall asleep, because that recording would definitely do the trick. But I never listened to Chopin otherwise. I thought of Chopin the way most detractors do--miniaturist, overly effete and perfumed salon music without much substance.
> 
> ...


This begs the question: How much the "middle person" is a factor? What I mean is Chopin is notes on a page now. Who or what creates the medium to connect with this or that music?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

howlingfantods said:


> I was convinced for many years that I didn't particularly care for Chopin. The only recording I had of his works was the collected Rubinstein (recommended as the top choice in virtually every magazine and record guide) plus a bit of Pollini and Ashkenazy.
> 
> I occasionally listened to Rubinstein's nocturnes when I couldn't fall asleep, because that recording would definitely do the trick. But I never listened to Chopin otherwise. I thought of Chopin the way most detractors do--miniaturist, overly effete and perfumed salon music without much substance.
> 
> ...


I'm not alone, then, in respecting Rubinstein's Chopin more than loving it. Maybe it's that he loves Chopin so much that he takes him "as is" and doesn't feel the need to search him for deeper meanings. The waltzes aren't deep music, and I don't find myself wanting to listen to them any more, so maybe the problem is me. But when I compared my several recordings of the Nocturnes, trying to decide which ones to keep and which to part with, I had no trouble keeping Garrick Ohlsson's and parting with Rubinstein's.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> I'm not alone, then, in respecting Rubinstein's Chopin more than loving it. Maybe it's that he loves Chopin so much that he takes him "as is" and doesn't feel the need to search him for deeper meanings. The waltzes aren't deep music, and I don't find myself wanting to listen to them any more, so maybe the problem is me. But when I compared my several recordings of the Nocturnes, trying to decide which ones to keep and which to part with, I had no trouble keeping Garrick Ohlsson's and parting with Rubinstein's.


I like Rubinstein in the Polonaises and the Mazurkas, the political music, at least in the pre-war performances. I think something happened to his interpretations when he started to be lionised, he started to be a bit too magisterial.

He's amazing in French muisic, Ravel, where the noble approach seems to suite.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Rubenstein's Chopin kind of drives me nuts in a bad way. I feel he is too consciously trying to seduce the ear. It makes me want to knock something over. For me William Kapell is just about the only way I can approach Chopin. A case where I admire the performer more than the music itself. For your comparison to Rubenstein.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

For me, Rubinstein's remarkably natural and unforced technical facility, that enabled him to be a star both as a child and into his 80s, enabled him to produce highly enjoyable versions of Chopin's waltzes. His legendary 1962 recording for RCA in Italy was done in a single session, and most of the waltzes after the first couple were done in a single take.

However, I agree with others here that I would not want to be limited to Rubinstein for Chopin, waltzes or otherwise.


----------



## Brahmsianhorn (Feb 17, 2017)

My go-to pianists for Chopin sets:

Ballades - Cortot
Etudes - Backhaus
Impromptus - Cortot
Mazurkas - Rubinstein (pre-war)
Nocturnes - Rubinstein (60s)
Polonaises - Pollini
Preludes - Cortot
Scherzi - Rubinstein (pre-war)
Waltzes - Lipatti


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)




----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> I'm not alone, then, in respecting Rubinstein's Chopin more than loving it. Maybe it's that he loves Chopin so much that he takes him "as is" and doesn't feel the need to search him for deeper meanings. The waltzes aren't deep music, and I don't find myself wanting to listen to them any more, so maybe the problem is me. But when I compared my several recordings of the Nocturnes, trying to decide which ones to keep and which to part with, I had no trouble keeping Garrick Ohlsson's and parting with Rubinstein's.


I also prefer some other pianists' Op. 18 waltz interpretations as I hear them occasionally on the radio or in performances. However, I always enjoy Rubinstein's restraint and the way he keeps the flow moving steadily and joyfully right along in the waltzes. I only own one recording of a Chopin waltz other than Rubinstein: John Browning's 1958 performance of the Op. 18 No. 1. Oh my, what a gem.

As for the Nocturnes, I do prefer Rubinstein above all others. For the Op. 10 and Op. 25 Études, though, it's Arrau and Browning all the way.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

seitzpf said:


> I also prefer some other pianists' Op. 18 waltz interpretations as I hear them occasionally on the radio or in performances. However, I always enjoy Rubinstein's restraint and the way he keeps the flow moving steadily and joyfully right along in the waltzes. I only own one recording of a Chopin waltz other than Rubinstein: John Browning's 1958 performance of the Op. 18 No. 1. Oh my, what a gem.
> 
> As for the Nocturnes, I do prefer Rubinstein above all others. For the Op. 10 and Op. 25 Études, though, it's Arrau and Browning all the way.


I blew off a chance to attend a concert by Browning when I was in college. What a dope I was. Also, the thread subject's name is of course spelled Rubinstein, as many of you did correctly unlike me, not Rubenstein. After reading his highly entertaining but Remembrance of Things Past-length autobiography, I at least ought to be able to spell his name. And on that subject, posters here correctly spell his first name "Arthur" and not "Artur". It was misspelled "Artur" on one of his concert programs and Rubinstein liked it and started using it.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Rubenstein always played the piano like a piano would wanted to be played. Of course he was a great pianist but there are other really fine traverses of the waltzes not least by Dinu Lipatti. We do tend to have CDs full of them and I often wonder just how Chopin would’ve wanted them played and whether he would’ve scratched his head in amazement that we sit down and listen to the whole lot at once


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

The sixties Chopin recordings by Rubinstein were recorded by the famous Decca team of John Culshaw, who were hired by RCA for their European recording projects. It always occurs to me how modern these recordings sound. Rubinstein is the yardstick for Chopin, but I appreciate Pollini for his somewhat more distant approach. Pogorelich recorded some very interesting Chopin, as did Argerich, Michelangeli and Sokolov. 

I agree with DavidA that Chopin is at his best when you listen to one piece in isolation, as opposed to entire cycles which are generally recorded. A plea for the revival of the recital album. Individual pieces reveal the beauty in his work and eliminate his image of sentimental perfumed Parisean salon player.

I think Chopin is generally underestimated as a composer.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

One thing about Rubinstein, he’s not very good at playing quietly. It’s as if he plays everything at a volume designed to fill the Carnegie Hall. I don’t like this.


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

DavidA said:


> Rubenstein always played the piano like a piano would wanted to be played. Of course he was a great pianist but there are other really fine traverses of the waltzes not least by Dinu Lipatti. We do tend to have CDs full of them and I often wonder just how Chopin would've wanted them played and whether he would've scratched his head in amazement that we sit down and listen to the whole lot at once


This is a great observation. It makes me remember live performances I attended in the 1970s by Van Cliburn and John Browning, who peppered their programs with Chopin interspersed among Beethoven, Liszt, Debussy, and (especially in Browning's case) Barber. The brilliance of Chopin the composer leapt out every time. I'm also reminded that Cliburn is IMO no slouch when it comes to Chopin.


----------



## fluteman (Dec 7, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> One thing about Rubinstein, he's not very good at playing quietly. It's as if he plays everything at a volume designed to fill the Carnegie Hall. I don't like this.


Rubinstein can surprise you. Check out his 1965 recording of Schubert's B-flat sonata for RCA, for example.


----------

