# Ravel - Pavane pour une infante défunte



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

I love this piece.

What do you think of the piece? What are your favorite recordings (piano and orchestra)? What do you think of Ravel's recording?


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

I've never bothered with the version for orchestra.

Re piano performances, Gieseking 1950s, very flowing and integrated.

The last time I listened to the music was in 2010, but at the time it caught my attention enough for me to check out several recordings and that mono one from Gieseking really caught my attention. However the fact that I've not bothered with the music for close to 10 years suggests that it's not a piece which is important in my life.

But because you started this thread, I just listened to it again and I can confirm, it is very special! Gieseking's Ravel is rather good generally.

Richter played it in Budapest in 1954, there's a recording. I'm not a great fan of Richter from this period but he really makes this music his own, he slows it down very bravlely, it's well worth seeking out despite bad sound and a nasty loud piano (some sort of Soviet piano presumably.) This could well be it in fact, I haven't checked






Emil Gilels gave it in a concert in Strasbourg in December 1979 and a friend of mine told me that it was amazing and that there's a recording somewhere on the internet. But I've never been able to find the recording. There's an earlier one by him but it hasn't excited my imagination, or rather it didn't in 2010.

The composer himself recorded it on a piano roll, fast as far as I can see but it may be that the speed is misleading because of the medium Still it's worth hearing as a curiosity (I'm assuming it's Ravel playing, but the attribution of some of these things is disputed, maybe this one. It could be Casadesus)


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

I loved this work when I was young, and I still love it now... the recording by George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra... I much prefer his unexaggerated straightforward approach and the fullness and warmth of the orchestration, done to virtual perfection:


----------



## flamencosketches (Jan 4, 2019)

Love Samson François for the piano version. As for the orchestral version, Marriner/ASMF have done pretty well with it.


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2019)

This is a favourite of the classical radio stations in the UK, and I guess elswhere.

For the orchestral version of this work, the one I particularly like is on the following CD by Ensemble Wien-Berlin. It contains several other well-known and delightful works by Ravel and Debussy, all recorded in 1989:










For the piano version, I like the one by Khatia Buniatishvili, and another by Louis Lortie. The CDs are easily found on Arkiv, Amazon or Presto.


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

The Pavane is one of Ravel's most concise and elegant pieces. Ravel said it should be slow, but then he raced to under six minutes himself. On the other hand, he showed little trace of sentimentality in his playing. Think most of his music should be played this way IMHO.

Among modern pianists, I like Pascal Rogé's warmth and Steven Osborne's unpretentious sensitivity, but personally I have a soft spot for the cool, even chilly, Jean-Philippe Collard.

For the orchestral version, I like a performance that is expressive, not too slow, and not falling for sentimentality, e.g. Monteux 61, Abbado/LSO (but not Boston), Martinon and Dutiot.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

I like this one very much, just an inch before the one above.
For piano my first choice will be Bertrand Chamayou and Lortie.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Kiki said:


> The Pavane is one of Ravel's most concise and elegant pieces. Ravel said it should be slow, but then he raced to under six minutes himself. On the other hand, he showed little trace of sentimentality in his playing. Think most of his music should be played this way IMHO.
> 
> Among modern pianists, I like Pascal Rogé's warmth and Steven Osborne's unpretentious sensitivity, but personally I have a soft spot for the cool, even chilly, Jean-Philippe Collard.
> 
> For the orchestral version, I like a performance that is expressive, not too slow, and not falling for sentimentality, e.g. Monteux 61, Abbado/LSO (but not Boston), Martinon and Dutiot.


Even granted that the performance is by Ravel, it may be that some types of roll speeded things up on playback. I forget the details here, it's only one type of roll, and I don't even know which type was used for the pavane, but I know it's a big problem for pianophiles.

Having said that, I have noticed that generally early performances of Debussy and Fauré are less romantic and slow than we've come to expect, so it wouldn't be surprising if the role reflected the composer's conception.

I'll also mention that I once heard someone who seemed to know what they were talking about say that Ravel wasn't so great a piano player.

I haven't heard Rogé, but I concur totally with your recommendation of Osborne.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

One of my favourite pieces. I learned how to play most of it on piano, although my technique sucks. The only orchestral version I accept is Dutoit's. Others I've heard are too sentimental. Ravel's own version on piano is nice, but could use more fantasy or Romance. His arpeggiated chords sound too mechanical after a while. Lortie is my favourite I've heard on piano.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

There's a way to calibrate the speed of a piano roll: The "roll speed" is often printed on the roll. This is generally somewhere between 50 and 120, the units are (feet per minute) X 10, i.e. between 5 and 12 feet per minute... This is all very well when the roll is being played in a pianola which could be calibrated by making markings on the roll a known distance apart say 10 feet and measuring the time the roll takes to move from one mark to the other. In this case, if the roll speed is 100 then the playing speed should be adjusted so that it takes 1 minute to cover this distance.

The Ravel piano roll sounds like it's at the proper speed to me… And it basically moves along at a nice pace but then does slow down to a dirge pace two or three times at the end of a phrase. I think the tempo is correct but the roll shows that Ravel was really not that much of a pianist himself. Still, I enjoyed his performance:


----------



## Kiki (Aug 15, 2018)

Mandryka said:


> Even granted that the performance is by Ravel, it may be that some types of roll speeded things up on playback. I forget the details here, it's only one type of roll, and I don't even know which type was used for the pavane, but I know it's a big problem for pianophiles.
> 
> Having said that, I have noticed that generally early performances of Debussy and Fauré are less romantic and slow than we've come to expect, so it wouldn't be surprising if the role reflected the composer's conception.
> 
> ...


Ravel being Ravel, since he said "slow", maybe "fast" is the way to go, just as how he did it, if it really was him playing and the piano roll playback speed was right. (He also said Boléro should last for 17 mins with a steady tempo, yet he went at 16 mins himself and slowed down along the way. :lol


----------



## Heck148 (Oct 27, 2016)

A lovely piece, indeed, and quite moving when played well...the orchestra version features a very exposed and difficult horn solo -_dol ce, espressivo_, very gentle and lyrical...it is a challenge for the orchestra - very soft, legato playing, no sharp edges, accents, abrupt attacks or entrances...

I've a few favorites:
Monteux/LSO is very good
Martinon/CSO is perhaps even better, but my all-time favorite is -

Reiner/Chicago....Reiner has the solo horn [P. Farkas] play with a remarkable veiled, almost misty sound, which floats so elegantly over the string woodwind chords, no pushing, no forcing......to me, it captures the essence of the work extremely well...


----------



## Oortone (Mar 27, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> One of my favourite pieces. I learned how to play most of it on piano, although my technique sucks. The only orchestral version I accept is Dutoit's. Others I've heard are too sentimental. Ravel's own version on piano is nice, but could use more fantasy or Romance. His arpeggiated chords sound too mechanical after a while. Lortie is my favourite I've heard on piano.


Same here I had a go on it as an amateur pianist and it's really a very pianistic piece, uses the unique quality of the instrument and therefore transaltes poorly to orchestra. Although slow, I find it very hard to play because of all the complicated grips.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

This has been a great little thread. For years I thought I was the only one who really loved this piece, but it turns out that I'm not alone at all!


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> I've never bothered with the version for orchestra... the fact that I've not bothered with the music for close to 10 years suggests that it's not a piece which is important in my life.





Mandryka said:


> For years I thought I was the only one who really loved this piece, but it turns out that I'm not alone at all!


Hmm...sometimes you say quite contradictory things!

Anyway I agree with those suggesting it is quite a challenge to play, and a wonderful piece. That said I seem to like most of the versions I've heard of this actually, (including Ravel's) The music generally seems to shine through for me somehow. I can only think of one version I really didn't like and it was a transcription for flute and guitar. At the moment my favorite is Andre Laplante on piano.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

tdc said:


> Hmm...sometimes you say quite contradictory things!


And even now a week after this thread was started I've only listened to it again once, and I don't feel the need to do so again soon. It somehow lives on in memory, waiting to be awoken from time to time. Does that make sense?


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> Richter played it in Budapest in 1954, there's a recording. I'm not a great fan of Richter from this period but he really makes this music his own, he slows it down very bravlely, it's well worth seeking out despite bad sound and a nasty loud piano (some sort of Soviet piano presumably.) This could well be it in fact, I haven't checked


A wonderful concerto for piano and coughs.


----------



## paulbest (Apr 18, 2019)

tdc said:


> Hmm...sometimes you say quite contradictory things!
> 
> At the moment my favorite is Andre Laplante on piano.


 No that's me, ,,I awaken to a work, which may have passed me by earlier,,,like saying,,,, on second thought....

As mentioned above, ravel never considered himselfa polished pianist, still, like Debussy in his works, I like how ravel takes pauses and adds nuances which only the composer knows how much to add in. 
I love Ravels' rendition. I have ,,oh 8 or 9 complete Ravel. . ,,there is one in particular which is stunning and so perfcet,,,Tharaud? Can't recall,. Not Thibaudet. 
I have the rare OOP Laplante, its not among my favs. 
And may sell it off, if I can get the right price.

Great work. Touching and beautiful.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> And even now a week after this thread was started I've only listened to it again once, and I don't feel the need to do so again soon. It somehow lives on in memory, waiting to be awoken from time to time. Does that make sense?


Well, kind of. It is a piece that is beautiful, and relatively simple in structure so maybe you don't want to ruin it by listening to it too much.


----------



## philoctetes (Jun 15, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> And even now a week after this thread was started I've only listened to it again once, and I don't feel the need to do so again soon. It somehow lives on in memory, waiting to be awoken from time to time. Does that make sense?


It's one of the best tunes I've been able to adapt to harmonica...it has the melodic movement a soloist needs to avoid being boring without requiring harmonic support... and it's diatonic...


----------

