# Most Intrusive Classical Performers



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Here is another thread opposite to the Capt'ns'. This one from his favourite performers. Who are some performers that just ruin it for you? I don't mean less inspiring or more mechanical performances, but with idiosyncrasies that just rub you the wrong way. 

I have to admit a lot of Gould, Bernstein, Lang Lang fits the bill. I used to be a big fan of Wilhelm Kempff, but more and more find much of his playing bordering on the annoying side. On other side of the bill, I used to find some of Perahia cloying, but later liked his insight.


----------



## David Phillips (Jun 26, 2017)

I used to be annoyed by the facial contortions of Anne Sophie-Mutter as she played, but I don't think she does it so much these days.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Really, Kempff? Care to cite an example of his “annoying” playing?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

^ I was astonished at that, too. But I guess some people react against the truly exceptional and Kempff was certainly that, albeit in a quiet and transcendental way.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> Really, Kempff? Care to cite an example of his "annoying" playing?


The aria of the Goldberg Variations.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Mandryka said:


> The aria of the Goldberg Variations.


Yes, I also find his aria quite an annoyance; the Aria da capo as well.


----------



## ECraigR (Jun 25, 2019)

I wouldn’t listen to only Gould’s interpretations of anything, but I tend to think they’re quite good. I like performers who make the music their own, so I’m far more likely to be turned off by a restrained performer as opposed to an intrusive one.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

For a similar reason as David mentions above for Anne Sophie Mutter - as much as I like a great deal of her playing and recordings I find the facial contortions of Mitsuko Uchida highly distracting. 
So I'll say no to attending any more of her concerts or watching any videos.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

When it comes to attending a concert with a piano soloist, I always prefer to sit on the keyboard side of the hall ... not because I want to see their hands but so that I don't have to see their facial contortions.

Note to self: avoid concerts with two pianists.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Bulldog said:


> Yes, I also find his aria quite an annoyance; the Aria da capo as well.







This one here? This _is_ annoying, why does he omit so much of the ornamentation?


----------



## Olias (Nov 18, 2010)

Anyone that hums while they play pretty much ruins it for me.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> This one here? This _is_ annoying, why does he omit so much of the ornamentation?


Well here's a suggestion: he wanted to make it sound lighter and more elegant, less baroque, more gallant. That's maybe not such a bad idea, Bach was right at the end of the line for Baroque, his kids and his peers had stopped writing baroque music for years and he was under constant attack for having one foot in an unattractively heavy, ugly past.

Maybe Kempff is saying that The Goldberg Variations is one of Bach's many attempts to get in tune with the latest ideas.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Kempff, at least post-1955, is very rarely particularly intrusive as regards his playing style, compared to a lot of other musicians.

But one person considered this LP-cover too coquettish and pathetic, whereas I found it a bit refreshing for its day (1963).

The focus on him in an 'emotional' state is certainly not typical for Kempff LP covers either.


----------



## Kollwitz (Jun 10, 2018)

Richard Goode's humming/singing was a bit _de trop_ when I saw him play at Wigmore Hall a few years ago. Didn't ruin the performance (it seemed to for some in the audience, notably the people in front of us who were aghast to discover at the interval that the humming had been coming from Goode) but I won't be in a rush to see him again.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Well I think another place where Kempff’s approach is very far from mainstream, very imaginative and original, is in the first movement of the Hammerklavier. And there are some examples in early Schubert too, but I’d have to work to retrieve them and I don’t have the time now. He was at times quite a crazy musician!


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

I find excessive use of rubato really annoying and cloying. So whilst I admire the musicianship of Maisky, for example, his excessive use of rubato (especially in Bach) just sounds wrong, occasionally ridiculous and really grates. It's a shame because he's a brilliant musician.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

There are several Kempff Hammerklaviers, such as the pre-War, the Decca mono, and the DG stereo. As regards tempo in the DG or Decca in the 1st movement, he is fairly standard, for instance. The slow movement in the DG has some very captivating phrasing, but it's not aggressively 'intrusive', IMO.

I have some of his pre-War Beethoven, but don't remember them right now; however, almost all pre-War recordings tend to be very different from today's musicianship (with exceptions).


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

joen_cph said:


> I have some of his pre-War Beethoven, but don't remember them right now; however, almost all pre-War recordings tend to be very different from today's musicianship (with exceptions).


I'm curious as to these exceptions. Who is a pre-war pianist who played in a style that is relatively in line with today's musicianship?


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> Well here's a suggestion: he wanted to make it sound lighter and more elegant, less baroque, more gallant. That's maybe not such a bad idea, Bach was right at the end of the line for Baroque, his kids and his peers had stopped writing baroque music for years and he was under constant attack for having one foot in an unattractively heavy, ugly past.
> 
> Maybe Kempff is saying that The Goldberg Variations is one of Bach's many attempts to get in tune with the latest ideas.


That all sounds plausible.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

flamencosketches said:


> I'm curious as to these exceptions. Who is a pre-war pianist who played in a style that is relatively in line with today's musicianship?


Not easy to say that generally, but my first thought would go to the conductor Felix Weingartner, _"...... a pioneer of objective interpretation."_ https://www.classicstoday.com/review/review-9914/)

also Emil von Sauer as a pianist had less of the outward eccentricities one tends to associate with early recordings,
"........ _interpretation is relaxed yet dramatic, the antithesis of the high-strung excitement generated by Alfred Cortot, who championed this concerto. After Sauer, other performances sound simplified into one-dimensional dramatic gestures_." (= about Schumann's concerto)

and of Wilhelm Backhaus it has been said
" _According to many critics, Backhaus was one of the first modern artists of the keyboard and played with a clean, spare, and objective style. In spite of this analytic approach, his performances are full of feeling._"
https://www.bach-cantatas.com/Bio/Backhaus-Wilhelm.htm

I'd like to emphasize, that there are exceptions among those people's recordings too, of course. And they are not musicians I have collected en masse, but I picked up a bit of what has been said & via listening to recordings. And of course, differences can be more subtle than the immediately obvious, plus the more 'objective' style I found very present in recordings of the 1970s -1990s (Pollini, Brendel, Perahia etc. of those days) has perhaps been more diversified now.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

joen_cph said:


> There are several Kempff Hammerklaviers, such as the pre-War, the Decca mono, and the DG stereo. As regards tempo in the DG or Decca in the 1st movement, he is fairly standard, for instance.


It's not the tempo I was thinking of it, it's the classical, poised, light, conception.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I think that stuff is less easy to determine. I find the slow movement very emotional.
But it's one of my favourite recordings.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> I'm curious as to these exceptions. Who is a pre-war pianist who played in a style that is relatively in line with today's musicianship?


I don't think the question makes sense, what are the characteristics of "today's musicianship?" I don't think there's enough homogeneity.

Still, even though it doesn't make sense, I can still answer it.

Rubinstein. Van Beinum.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Rubinstein went through an extreme development IMO. I know some people talked/talk about an early objectivity in his style, but that's not what I hear. But I hear more of it in his later recordings, say in his Chopin. I prefer his earlier recordings, say pre-1955.

EDIT: But I like say the often more objective, slower 'grandeur' in his later concerto recordings, though - including Mozart and Beethoven.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

joen_cph said:


> Rubinstein went through an extreme development IMO. I know some people talked/talk about an early objectivity in his style, but that's not what I hear. But I hear it in his later recordings.


Yes I can see that. What about Godowski?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Can't say, since I've heard only little Godowski & he didn't record much, as far as I know.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> I don't think the question makes sense, what are the characteristics of "today's musicianship?" I don't think there's enough homogeneity.
> 
> Still, even though it doesn't make sense, I can still answer it.
> 
> Rubinstein. Van Beinum.


Maybe not, I was just responding to a statement of joen_cph, where he said that there were exceptions to the rule that pre-war recordings do not reflect modern musicianship, which I found amazing. This is 75+ years ago we are talking, why should there be any congruence with the way that people play in 2019? But since the two of you have provided me with examples, I shall have to check them out.

Funny that you say Rubinstein, to me, he exemplifies a style of playing that is kind of dated, not really around anymore. Though I'm sure if I ask, you'll rebut with a couple dozen contemporary pianists I've never heard of who play according to his tradition. :lol:


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Be aware of the big difference between stereo Rubinstein and the earliest one.

Also: I'm not a musician.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

joen_cph said:


> Can't say, since I've heard only little Godowski & he didn't record much, as far as I know.


Some nocturnes, Chopin nocturnes. You'll either think they're bad because they're objective and cold, or very good because they're objective and cold.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

flamencosketches said:


> Funny that you say Rubinstein, to me, he exemplifies a style of playing that is kind of dated, not really around anymore. Though I'm sure if I ask, you'll rebut with a couple dozen contemporary pianists I've never heard of who play according to his tradition. :lol:


Have a listen if you can find it to my favourite thing by Rubinstein - Ravel's Valses Nobles et Sentimentales. He really was outstanding in French music I think. Also, the Appassionata, there's an early Appassionata which I don't have any more.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Mandryka said:


> Some nocturnes, Chopin nocturnes. You'll either think they're bad because they're objective and cold, or very good because they're objective and cold.


Probably a good description.


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Mandryka said:


> Have a listen if you can find it to my favourite thing by Rubinstein - Ravel's Valses Nobles et Sentimentales. He really was outstanding in French music I think. Also, the Appassionata, there's an early Appassionata which I don't have any more.


Will do, I love that piece and have heard several interpretations. Never sure whose I like the most, and surely this will complicate things as I'm a fan of Rubinstein already.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

If the music making is compelling (OK, a subjective quality) then there is little that I find distracting or intrusive. I don't mind performers who hum or sing along with their playing, for example. Also, it doesn't bother me when a familiar piece is played "differently" just so long as the differences make sense are within the bounds of taste (again subjective but also a matter of the period the music was written in) and the music making _is _compelling. I sometimes regret getting used to a different approach so that it no longer thrills me as it had at first but this doesn't amount to rejecting the differences. Sometimes, a difference can seem perverse until later on in the piece the new way leads to an overwhelming result. Many of Celibidache's Munich performances are like that for me.

But when an artist is indulgent - slowing or changing the pace, cutting up the pulse without delivering a result that makes uses the "insights" that the performer may feel s/he is displaying, indulging in inappropriately excessive emotion (a lot of Marriner's work) - I can react quite negatively. Furtwangler had a reputation for changing speeds but I have never heard a performance from him where this is distracting. But some of those who are seen as following his example in this - Barenboim comes to mind - seem to fail totally in keeping the work alive.

On Kempff, I always hear his work as very personal. I feel he is playing for himself rather than for an audience. And he certainly gives himself some wonderful performances! We are privileged eavesdroppers. I don't enjoy his Bach, though. Another pianist who has been mentioned as distracting (for his singing in this case), Richard Goode, gives us Mozart that is as unmannered as possible (often with no appropriate decoration) but I find the result somehow (I don't know how) deeply satisfying. His Beethoven sonatas are more individual and I find them mixed (some I really like, others turn me off a little).

Most of all, I find the bland to be distracting. One person's blandness is another's authentic but, to me, dullness (in presenting works of almost miraculous inspiration!) is the worst that can happen in a performance.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

Can agree with the mostly 'introvert' quality in Kempff's playing. 

His "Emperor Concerto"/Leitner is more extrovert, though, IMO. Same seems to be the case with the 1930x with Raabe.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

flamencosketches said:


> Really, Kempff? Care to cite an example of his "annoying" playing?


I found his recorded version of Beethoven's Tempest, Appassionata, Schumann's concerto, and his 2nd version with Lietner of the Emperor too cloying. Ok, it's not that much of his playing that becomes annoying, but some of my favourite works. By overinterpreting, and sometimes just not letting the music be as it is. It worked well in Moonlight and Waldstein. I'm comparing to when he was my #1. He has always been well above much of today's standard of interpretation.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

> If the music making is compelling (OK, a subjective quality) then there is little that I find distracting or intrusive. I don't mind performers who hum or sing along with their playing, for example.


Agreed. I enjoy my Gould and Jarrett albums. Now if they were coughing through the music like people in the audience, I would have to object.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Kempff was a very great pianist with a wonderful touch. Not the greatest technician but perfectly adequate. You need to hear his 50s performances of the Beethoven sonatas / concertos to hear him at his best. His Mozart is also sublime as is his Schubert.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> Appassionata, . . . overinterpreting .


I have four recordings of him playing it, there are probably more. Which one are you talking about?

I do don't hear over-interpretation in the one I'm listening to now, the live one from Japan. What I do hear is a distinctive tone and touch sometimes when he plays quietly, i wonder if that's what you're getting at. Who do you think doesn't over-interpret the Appassionata?


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Kempff can sometimes be quite disturbing, when he's inspired there's a sort sense of self abandon which verges on madness in his playing which I very much appreciate in c19 music. His brand of music making is as far from sobre as it's possible to get, and yet is rarely demonstrative emotionally. I'm listening to a live op 111/ii which has this quality, that's what prompted me to mention it here. It's a very good op 111/ii, this CD









(How tame op 111/ii feels after listening yesterday to op 131/iv! I suppose these things are what they are and it's good we have them both.)


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> I have four recordings of him playing it, there are probably more. Which one are you talking about?
> 
> I do don't hear over-interpretation in the one I'm listening to now, the live one from Japan. What I do hear is a distinctive tone and touch sometimes when he plays quietly, i wonder if that's what you're getting at. Who do you think doesn't over-interpret the Appassionata?


The one on DG, at least the most available version. He tries to put mystical poetry in all his playing (possibly to cover up his technical shortcomings? Maybe not, but he hasn't proven that doubt to me) which works better sometimes than others, but when it doesn't it's cloying to me. That is a piece that is best left simple. Gilels does it way, way better to me.


----------

