# Vladimir Ashkenazy



## Sofronitsky

This musician is legendary, and has had a prodigious career as a pianist and a conductor. I have a problem, with Ashkenazy, though. Aside from his Rachmaninoff Concerti (which I consider top notch) I have never heard him play something that amazed me. To me, it's always run of the mill brilliant playing without much personality. I've heard his Chopin Etudes, Scriabin Sonatas, Chopin Nocturnes, Rachmaninoff Preludes /sonatas etc. etc. And while I never disliked these performances, I was never really affected by them.

I was wondering if anyone feels the same way? Maybe someone could suggest a good recording that might change my opinion, also.


----------



## tdc

I've thought similar things when it comes to Ashkenazy's Well-Tempered Clavier and his Chopin - they left me generally unimpressed. I had all but written him off actually until I'd listened to his Beethoven Piano Sonatas which imo he does quite well on. I guess he is perhaps rather hit and miss, though even at his worst (that I've heard) he is not too bad.


----------



## Ukko

Ashkenazy was one of the early exports from the cold war era of the USSR. To fairly judge his pianism, it is necessary to hear recordings from before he turned his focus to conducting. His technique was more than adequate, and his interpretations could move the audience. Gilels and Richter achieved greater acclaim in the West though, and then so did Berman for awhile. Ashkenazy turned his Russian School viewpoints to conducting, and his recordings of the Russian composers indicate that he made a good decision. The recordings of Rachmaninoff's orchestral works with the Concertgebouw Orchestra (recommending in a post here a few days back - thanks) are fine examples of his success. He seems to have practiced the piano often enough after changing focus, but the interpretive edge was gone.

IMO, YMMV.


----------



## Weston

That very lack of personality is what I like about Ashkenazy. I listen to his Beethoven piano concertos as a kind of base line for comparing other interpretations. They may not be flashy, but neither are they distracting when I just want to hear Beethoven -- if that makes nay sense.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I agree that Ashkenazy is quite good with regard to Beethoven... and Shostakovitch's Preludes and Fugues as well. I don't know that there is any work that I would name him as the first choice for (excepting the Shostakovitch)... but that may be true of many pianists... many whom I greatly admire.


----------



## Meaghan

I think he's know for his Beethoven. I've heard most of his Beethoven sonata cycle and I mostly like it. Some of his interpretations do more for me than others, though. For instance: _Lebewohl,_ excellent; _Tempest_ (especially the middle movement)... hmm... not as I would play it (if I could play it exactly as I want).

What I like about his Beethoven is its great clarity. You can pretty much see everything he is playing on the page; he doesn't distort things. Occasionally, this results in his playing being not expressive enough for my taste, but most of the time it is satisfying because it allows the character of the composition to come through without being masked by too much _performer_ (if that makes any sense). It's often plenty expressive; what's nice about Ashkenzy is that he manages to make it so without being over-the-top and chessy about it.


----------



## Aramis

He's good at walloping the keyboard, not that good when playing requires more sensitivity. That's why he made great recordings of Prokofiev but rather bad ones of Chopin and his Scriabin and Rachmaninoff if half here half there because when they get russian he feels at home but in lyrical parts influenced by Chopin (slow movement of Scriabin's PC for example) his weaknesess come out. I don't like his Beethoven PC series with Solti too. But overally I like him and some of his CDs occupy important place in my collection.


----------



## joen_cph

The best I´ve got are the *Rach* 3s, the *Scriabin* sonatas - and the* Sibelius*/decca "En Saga" in the LP-version, where, unfortunately, the CD transfer editing resulted in much less impressive sound, especially ruining the final part. Some of his early recordings, like the* Chopin *Etudes and *Liszt* Mephisto (mono) are not particularly interesting, most of his recordings are good or all-rightish if not exceedingly spectacular - with fine sound though. And the repertoire he has been doing has always been of good taste.


----------



## Bix

Aramis said:


> I don't like his Beethoven PC series with Solti too. But overally I like him and some of his CDs occupy important place in my collection.


Mine too


----------



## kv466

I've always thought the same...solid player, nothing very special...always a better player to his performances


----------



## itywltmt

I echo most of your sentiments.

One collection you omitted so far is his Mozart concerti as pianist and conductor - I think these represent his first foray into conducting. I find them to be somewhere between good and very good.










As for his conducting, in general, I find it to be hit and miss, but that's personal taste speaking...


----------



## Sid James

I can only vouch for Mr Ashkenazy's Beethoven & Rachmaninov (as pianist). I think he plays them quite well, & see logic in what Aramis speaks to - he has a very vigorous and fiery style, he's probably best in these kinds of things. I have him playing the music of those two composers from 1960's-70's recordings & the man was "on fire" then, in his younger days. I am not familiar with his more recent recordings as pianist.

BTW - Ashkenazy is currently chief conductor of the Sydney Symphony Orch. here in Australia. Last year he started a Mahler cycle (live performances recorded for CD) which is to conclude by the end of this year (some of those recordings have already come out). He's also championed some composers dear to his heart, esp. Prokofiev (he did a mini-festival of this composer's works with the SSO a couple of years back, this was also released on disc). I have acquaintances who recently saw him conduct part of the Mahler cycle, and they were pretty impressed. I haven't heard his efforts as a conductor, & getting some of his recordings put down here would be a good "first step." It's great to have a man of so many talents & such high calibre working here Down Under. I think he's retired from playing piano in public, is that true???...


----------



## Sid James

Sofronitsky said:


> This musician is legendary, and has had a prodigious career as a pianist and a conductor. I have a problem, with Ashkenazy, though. Aside from his Rachmaninoff Concerti (which I consider top notch) I have never heard him play something that amazed me. To me, it's always run of the mill brilliant playing without much personality...Maybe someone could suggest a good recording that might change my opinion, also.


I've got Ashkenazy's recording of two key Beethoven sonatas, put down in the late 1960's. I think he's pretty good in these, very fiery and vigorous. The finale of the _Waldstein Sonata_ has a very happy feel, sounding to me being played to sound like ringing bells (maybe Rachmaninov is a point of reference for this pianist here, rightly or wrongly, or in between?). Review below (which is kind of mixed, but I don't take much notice of these things, I trust my own "instinctive" judgement a bit more) & also the front cover of the CD -

http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2010/Aug10/Beethoven_Ashkenazy_4801304.htm


----------



## itywltmt

Sid James said:


> I've got Ashkenazy's recording of two key Beethoven sonatas, put down in the late 1960's. I think he's pretty good in these, very fiery and vigorous. The finale of the _Waldstein Sonata_ has a very happy feel, sounding to me being played to sound like ringing bells (maybe Rachmaninov is a point of reference for this pianist here, rightly or wrongly, or in between?). Review below (which is kind of mixed, but I don't take much notice of these things, I trust my own "instinctive" judgement a bit more) & also the front cover of the CD -
> 
> http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2010/Aug10/Beethoven_Ashkenazy_4801304.htm


I own the ASshkenazy beethoven sonata cycle, budget priced. I think it's great value.


----------



## Sid James

itywltmt said:


> I own the ASshkenazy beethoven sonata cycle, budget priced. I think it's great value.


Looks good, itywltmt. Ashkenazy recorded two Beethoven sonata cycles (I think?), one earlier on in the 1960's-70's & the other one later in about the 1980's (both for Decca). The writer of the liner notes for my Eloquence disc I posted above does compare the two cycles a bit, but I think he sees the main difference between the two to be better, more detailed sound in the second cycle compared to the first. That's what I remember him writing, anyway...


----------



## itywltmt

Since the selections as "ADD", the box set is probably the first. At one point, I owned the Moonlight/Appassionata/Waldstein coupling on the DECCA "Jubilee" series, so these have been in re-edition forever.

Probably because they are good!


----------



## TxllxT

*Prokofiev War Sonatas 6 7 8*










On the cover a greyhaired Vladimir (Decca 1995), but what a mastering of the piano! I've got Pletnev, Richter, Lugansky and a lot more, but no one brings out the lyrical motoric syncopation like Ashkenazy. Ashkenazy doesn't have the right _touché_ for playing Mozart. I remember that he and Murray Perahia were recording Mozart's piano concertos at the same time. On all aspects Perahia is to be preferred. I've got all Chopin with Ashkenazy and here his strong side appears: serving the music, not virtuosic drawing attention to himself (à la Horowitz or Volodos). His career as conductor I regard as wobbly: great Rachmaninov symphonies (with RCO), uninteresting middle-of-the-road in Sibelius, Prokofiev's Ballets. Shostakovich' Preludes & Fugues by Ashkenazy aren't too bad, but when you hear Tatiana Nikolayeva (to whom Shostakovich dedicated the work) his depth of understanding shows, well, some lack of it.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

My collection of his recordings is very narrow. I like his recording of the Seasons by P. Tchaikovsky. And like his Prokofiev's Fifth with Cocertgebouw (maybe because of the orchestra). In Rachmaninov 2nd concerto I like Muti and Gavrilov more.


----------



## SIMON S

I think Ashkenazy represents a lot of the problems in the recording industry. A company takes on a risk when it takes up a new artist. It then invests a lot in their promotion, and marketing. You get sets of "The Great Pianists". This is all corporate marketing. As is often the case in monopolistic capitalism a few artists are targeted, and so they dominate recordings, performances etc. When interviewed Ashkenazy said that few people have the talent to be a concert pianist. Actually, I think you will find it has more to do with the nature of the industry than talent.

I think Ashkenazy is strong on Rachmaninoff, although I do not think it is really as profound as is hyped up. His Chopin and Ravel are dreadful, sorry, but I think hundreds of people can play it better than that. I think his playing reflects the Soviet style of teaching which was intense and designed to win competitions - a bit like their athletes during the Cold War. 

Ironically the Soviets allowed Ashkenazy to make a fortune when he stayed on in the West during one of his concerts. Spies after him? Very unlikely that intelligence agencies are interested in concert pianists or regard them as a security threat. But it is good mystique and marketing for the record companies!


----------



## shadowdancer

Since someone ressurected this 3 year's old thread, I will drop my 2 cents.
Ashkenazy as a piano player does a fine job here:







In the same level of Horowitz and Pogorelich, this both my top choices.


----------



## JACE

I admire Ashkenazy.

As a conductor, I particularly enjoy his Shostakovich, Rachmaninoff, and Scriabin recordings. His Sibelius is excellent too; it's more "Russian-sounding" than some others, which may or may not be a compliment, depending on your tastes. (From my point of view, it's a compliment. ) As a pianist, I think his recording of Shostakovich's Preludes & Fugues are unsurpassed. I also very much like his Scriabin, Rachmaninoff, and Beethoven.

Ashkenazy doesn't have the out-sized personality of some musicians. For example, his Chopin isn't as intense as Moravec's or as immaculate as Michelangeli's. And his Scriabin isn't as glittering as Horowitz's or as wildly distinctive as Sofronitsky's.

On the other hand, I think Ashkenazy's strengths are "in the middle," whether it's his piano-playing or his conducting. What do I mean? His poetry is easy to miss because it isn't _glaring_. He's unfailingly musical. I like the sort of artistic translucency that Ashkenazy seems to cultivate.

To use a literary analogy: Nabakov can take your breath away with a turn of phrase. The poetry jumps off the page. Chekhov couldn't be more different. His prose never draws attention to itself; the art is in transparency of the words.

Ashkenazy is more like Chekhov.


----------



## hpowders

^^^I have his Shostakovich 15th. Haven't played it in a long time. Time to get it ready.


----------



## Cosmos

Idk what the general consensus of Ashkenazy's Scriabin Sonata set, but IMO it's the best Scriabin I've heard

I also have a few of his orchestral music, and enjoy all of his interpretations.


----------



## Vaneyes

Ashkenazy (Decca) strikes me as being in a similar pianistic camp as Perahia (Sony), Brendel (Philips), and Jando (Naxos). Essentially, they're "house pianists". Over decades, go-to guys for their labels. There were forerunners. The likelihood of more in this ilk to follow has lessened considerably.

Don't be too harsh with them.


----------



## Bulldog

SIMON S said:


> I think Ashkenazy represents a lot of the problems in the recording industry. A company takes on a risk when it takes up a new artist. It then invests a lot in their promotion, and marketing. You get sets of "The Great Pianists". This is all corporate marketing. As is often the case in monopolistic capitalism a few artists are targeted, and so they dominate recordings, performances etc.


What do you find monopolistic about the recording industry?


----------



## Vaneyes

The closest it probably got to a monopoly was with the five majors. Decca, DG, Philips, Sony, EMI. Their last burst was trying to dictate and control high CD pricing in the 80's.


----------



## hpowders

Ashkenazy made a wonderful recording of Beethoven's Diabelli Variations. Top notch!


----------



## Blancrocher

I was just snooping around spotify and found the collection, "Vladimir Ashkenazy: A Personal Collection." It's got some interesting recordings on it that I've enjoyed in the past, but my big discovery was the interview at the end (with Christopher Nupen). He's a very enthusiastic, infectious personality, and that comes through in the interview; he also seems to be a truly humble person. Some very interesting information about living and playing in Soviet Russia. My favorite anecdote, though, involves how his future wife, Þórunn Jóhannsdóttir, gradually got him to fall in love with Sibelius! Those interested in the pianist might like to seek it out.


----------



## MoonlightSonata

hpowders said:


> Ashkenazy made a wonderful recording of Beethoven's Diabelli Variations. Top notch!


That sounds amazing - I want to listen now!


----------



## hpowders

MoonlightSonata said:


> That sounds amazing - I want to listen now!


Go for it! I'm so impressed I'm thinking of opening up Diabelli's Pizzeria.

Pizza the way you want it...with many variations.


----------



## MoonlightSonata

hpowders said:


> Go for it! I'm so impressed I'm thinking of changing my name to Diabelli!


That's not a bad name, actually...


----------



## hpowders

MoonlightSonata said:


> That's not a bad name, actually...


I've never seen it used by anybody else.


----------



## pianississimo

Ashkenazy's performances are always full of the love he has for the music he plays.
He doesn't force his personality into it and you never 'hear' his rubato. It's there though, subtly and appropriately.
This is a balanced and steady man who plays the musical ideas of the composers as he understands them and with reverence and just pure love.

I have a recording of his Mozart concerto K467 with Andre Previn and the LSO. This legendary series of recordings covered a lot of different composers and showed his varied repertoire off to a perfection.
Just before the second movement (one of the most famous slow movements of all) there's a tiny sigh from the soloist (I'm guessing) which sounds to me like pure happiness. I've seen videos of him playing and been privileged to have seen him conduct this concerto. Again he seemed to me to be full of happiness and the performance reflected this.

His Chopin is never ever flashy but it is brilliant and shimmers rather than sparkles.
The concert where I saw him conduct this concerto followed a presentation of an honorary doctorate in Music from Leicester University 
It was an almost comical presentation. V Ashkenazy is not the tallest of men and the two principals of the university were practically giants.
Three thrones (not kidding) were set up on stage, with the grandest one in the middle. The two principals of the university walked on stage right, with VA in the middle. They were wearing very elaborate professorial gowns, complete with the tasseled hat. 
Vladimir looked like a small boy who had been sent to the headmasters for chewing gum in class.
Professor Sir Robert Burgess spoke about why they'd honored this musician. He said that his life and work reflected their guiding principals of education for all and inspiration through example. he cited his recording of Chopin's etudes as the best recording of the set _ever_.
At this point, Ashkenazy, who was seated on his throne, his feet barely touching the floor, looked aghast and shook his head vigorously.
He continued to veer between bashfulness and glumness as his achievements and honours were listed.
At the end he was presented with the scroll that conferred his honorary doctorate and was invited to give his acceptance speech.
He stepped up to the podium and told us the story of the one and only time that he'd ever been invited to the Kremlin in Moscow. It was in the 1950's and the ceremony was to award an honour to Svatoslav Richter. Of course it was an intensely political occasion and as Vladimir described it, went 'on and on for HOURS about how great the party was and other blah blah blah'. 
At the end of all that they finally got around to presenting the award. Richter stepped up to give his speech. He mumbled into the mike "thanks I'll do my best" and that was it. 
Ashkenazy paused for the chuckle from the audience and then mumbled into the mike. 'Thanks, I'll do my best'
And that was it.

The  concert was fantastic. 
I only wish I'd discovered him early enough to hear him playing it.

It was one of the first piano concerto series I bought and I've turned to it again and again since.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0048KQRAU/ref=dm_cd_album_lnk

I don't think his playing is boring. I think he plays without letting his ego spoil it. That to me makes a better and more memorable performance.


----------



## Ajayay

I used to really like Ashkenazy's playing. His early recording of the Chopin studies was excellent and he also made a very good recording of the Liszt Mephisto Waltz. But I do find some of his later playing extremely "reliable" in terms of notes but somewhat lacking in brilliance or sparkle or magic, it's just very workmanlike. Maybe I'm being a bit harsh.

I attended a talk he gave years ago in Oxford. The audience begged him at the end to play something but he refused on the grounds that he hadn't prepared anything. On the one hand I don't blame him - he wasn't booked to play and he wants to maintain a certain public standard, on the other hand would it really have killed him to give us 2 minutes of something, anything?!


----------



## Mohayeji

pianississimo said:


> Ashkenazy's performances are always full of the love he has for the music he plays.
> He doesn't force his personality into it and you never 'hear' his rubato. It's there though, subtly and appropriately.
> This is a balanced and steady man who plays the musical ideas of the composers as he understands them and with reverence and just pure love.
> 
> I have a recording of his Mozart concerto K467 with Andre Previn and the LSO. This legendary series of recordings covered a lot of different composers and showed his varied repertoire off to a perfection.
> Just before the second movement (one of the most famous slow movements of all) there's a tiny sigh from the soloist (I'm guessing) which sounds to me like pure happiness. I've seen videos of him playing and been privileged to have seen him conduct this concerto. Again he seemed to me to be full of happiness and the performance reflected this.
> 
> His Chopin is never ever flashy but it is brilliant and shimmers rather than sparkles.


[/QUOTE]I don't think his playing is boring. I think he plays without letting his ego spoil it. That to me makes a better and more memorable performance.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree... Thanks!


----------



## Fenestella

As a general rule for evaluating the pianism of someone from the interwar or postwar generations, listen to his early recordings.
To appreciate Ashkenazy's pianism, listen to his early recordings released by Testament, Urania, Berlin Classics.


----------



## Holden4th

Fenestella said:


> As a general rule for evaluating the pianism of someone from the interwar or postwar generations, listen to his early recordings.
> To appreciate Ashkenazy's pianism, listen to his early recordings released by Testament, Urania, Berlin Classics.


Do you have an online site where I can listen to these? The best overall recording of the Chopin Etudes, IMO, is Ashkenazy's from his early Moscow days so I would be interested in hearing him from this period. I believe that set was issued by Testament but I'd have to go back into my collection to find out.


----------



## Fenestella

Holden4th said:


> set was issued by Testament but I'd have to go back into my collection to find out.


The Young Ashkenazy, 2 Volumes - I would rank that recording of Chopin's 2nd Concerto even above Yakov Zak's, second only to Josef Hofmann's.


----------



## Merl

As a conductor he rarely does anything 'outrageous' (or even terribly exciting). Don't get me wrong, his Beethoven recordings are very nice (his Pastoral is a lovely account) but his Aussie Mahler cycle lacks punch, as lovely as much as it is.


----------



## Holden4th

Fenestella said:


> The Young Ashkenazy, 2 Volumes - I would rank that recording of Chopin's 2nd Concerto even above Yakov Zak's, second only to Josef Hofmann's.


Fenestella is correct, those are the only recordings of Chopin on Testament. The Moscow Etudes are/were on Melodiya. I think I got confused with Pollini


----------



## Strange Magic

Merl said:


> As a conductor he rarely does anything 'outrageous' (or even terribly exciting). Don't get me wrong, his Beethoven recordings are very nice (his Pastoral is a lovely account) but his Aussie Mahler cycle lacks punch, as lovely as much as it is.


.

I agree. I find also his Sibelius tone poems to be sluggish--I posted once before about his sledge in _En Saga_ sounding like it was mired deep in the mud rather than relentlessly moving forward through the wintry landscape .


----------



## Crystal

I love Ashkenazy's Chopin


----------



## flamencosketches

Considered making a thread, but I'm bumping this one instead. I have been listening to a few albums of Ashkenazy's recordings lately, namely the Rachmaninoff Preludes, the Scriabin Sonatas, and his album "Chopin Piano Favourites" recorded in the '80s, I believe. I borrowed the latter CD from my girlfriend, not expecting much; I already have my favorites with Chopin pianists. But yet I am quite impressed. I didn't think it was possible to pull off Chopin playing with such minimal sentimentality and subjective expressiveness (for lack of a better description), but he totally does. Ashkenazy is a great pianist. He plays in a totally clean and no-nonsense style, but yet he scarcely misses the nuance of the repertoire he's working with. As such through listening to his playing I've been able to appreciate certain works I didn't quite get in others' interpretations, such as the Polonaises - certain others either don't put enough power into them or try to tame them into something more subtle than they are, but Ashkenazy strikes a good balance. 

Anyway, what do we think of him here? He had flown under my radar a bit until pretty recently. In my eyes he's one of the better living pianists.

I'm also not at all familiar with his conducting - any good? What are some of his greatest achievements in this space? I know he recorded the Scriabin symphony cycle, but haven't heard it.


----------



## joen_cph

Strange Magic said:


> .
> 
> I agree. I find also his Sibelius tone poems to be sluggish--I posted once before about his sledge in _En Saga_ sounding like it was mired deep in the mud rather than relentlessly moving forward through the wintry landscape .


The Decca _En Saga_ has some of the most impressive fanfare sections at the end I know of, unfortunately the CD transfer I heard didn't catch it in the way the old LP did.


----------



## DavidA

Vaneyes said:


> Ashkenazy (Decca) strikes me as being in a similar pianistic camp as Perahia (Sony), Brendel (Philips), and Jando (Naxos). Essentially, they're "house pianists". Over decades, go-to guys for their labels. There were forerunners. The likelihood of more in this ilk to follow has lessened considerably.
> 
> Don't be too harsh with them.


I wouldn't exactly call Brendel and Perahia - two of the greatest of their generation - house pianists. Of course, Jando was that for Naxos but produced lots of fine recordings for them


----------



## DavidA

He is a very fine pianist indeed. Great perfraomnces of Rach with Previn. I also like his Beethoven concertos with Solti where two contrasting style strike sparks. You could always recommend his recordings but perhaps not the absolute first flight.
One thing - he said that he didn't like to play the Tchaikovsky concerto because his hands were too small. Yet he played Rachmaninov. Any thoughts on this?


----------



## joen_cph

I haven't heard this, but there are recordings of the Tchaikovsky 1st Concerto, even early ones, of course ...


----------



## DavidA

joen_cph said:


> I haven't heard this, but there are recordings of the Tchaikovsky 1st Concerto, even early ones, of course ...


Yes he said he didn't want to enter the Tchaikovsky competition (which he knew was fixed anyway) but the authorities made him.


----------



## Larkenfield

Superb conductor that I care for more than his playing. It's fine but I was rarely struck with his poetic depths like a Rubinstein.


----------



## Bourdon

DavidA said:


> He is a very fine pianist indeed. Great perfraomnces of Rach with Previn. I also like his Beethoven concertos with Solti where two contrasting style strike sparks. You could always recommend his recordings but perhaps not the absolute first flight.
> One thing - he said that he didn't like to play the Tchaikovsky concerto because his hands were too small. Yet he played Rachmaninov. Any thoughts on this?


 Ashkenazy thoroughly dislikes Tchaikovsky's warhorse

Ashkenazy has never played this concerto in concert in his professional career. He simply doesn't like the concerto. He gives his opinion quite readily in this interview in which he says, "I don't very much like the Tchaikovsky concerto. I think it can be made attractive, but it is difficult to put substance into a piece where there is very little substance. I don't think I am the right man for the concerto".

https://www.quora.com/Is-Tchaikovsk...-execute-technically-than-the-Violin-Concerto


----------



## NLAdriaan

Larkenfield said:


> Superb conductor that I care for more than his playing. It's fine but I was rarely struck with his poetic depths like a Rubinstein.


Each his own. I personally really like his powerful and brilliant Rachmaninov 2,4 and Brahms 1 concertos with Haitink and RCO, also because of the presence and muscle of the orchestra. From his conducting I like his Rachmaninov series, also with the RCO. Piano solo, I prefer others.

Ashkenazy was indeed Decca's house pianist in the eighties, so he got to fill the catalogue in the digital/CD era.


----------



## Subutai

If it wasn't for Ashkenazy, I'm not sure I would have become the avid collector I am. Over a decade ago now when I thought I'd try classical music as I knew I liked some pieces, but knew little else. I heard a piece here, a piece there, then one day I heard Ashkenazy playing Rachmaninov's piano concerto 2 with Kondrashin at the helm, and the music just stopped me in my tracks. I recall wondering how I had lived 4 decades, listened to every type of music throughout and not heard THAT! It was a premonition that set me on my path to a life well heard. Perhaps played by another and I may have carried on walking.


----------



## JohnP

I'm late to this thread, as I've just begun posting. The OP is not won over by just the traits I admire in Ashkenazy (as a pianist). As far as I can tell--without scores but with decades of loving classical piano music--he played the music as written. He was not interested in impressing us with his personality. Instead, he endeavored to present what the composer wrote with a high degree of facility and art. In that regard, I can agree with the poster who says he uses Ashkenazy's performances as a baseline by which to judge others. Is he the most exciting pianist. No, I agree with the OP that he's not. Is he honest, technically impressive, and consistently reliable? Yes, he is. We make a mistake, I think, in not valuing those qualities more than we do. 

Btw, the previous post in this thread, Sabutai's account of being knocked out by Ashkenazy's Rach 2 is a pleasure. Most of us have a story like that. But, for me, such stories are always exciting to read. (Maybe that would make a good thread--"How a particular performance or a particular piece of music made me a classical music lover." Long-winded, so maybe you can improve on the wording. Or maybe the thread already exists, back in the archives somewhere. )


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Agree with some of that but I'm afraid I'd make an exception for Ashkenazy's Mozart concertos, which I find seriously overrated. For me he loves the music "not wisely but too well", which too often leads to lumpy phrasing and the kind of over-personalised intrusion into the music which you (rightly) say he generally avoids. 

Overall, like an earlier poster I tend to prefer his podium work. In my experience, when he conducts he retains that reliable musicality but manages to combine it with a bit more vim and vigour.


----------



## Mandryka

I have a recording of him playing the K466 with Bruno Maderna, Philadelphia Orchestra in 1971. It is rather good!


----------



## Animal the Drummer

Interesting. I'll see if it's on Youtube or some such.


----------



## Forster

Sofronitsky said:


> [Ashkenazy's playing is] run of the mill brilliant


An oxymoron if ever there was one. Surely 'brilliant' is...well...brilliant, and can't be "run-of-the-mill"?


----------



## Josquin13

I think he's a great Chopin player. But not in the way that some of the old school Chopin pianists were, who took greater creative liberties with Chopin's scores (& many of those old recordings I treasure, too). As a listener, you can't approach Ashkenazy's Chopin with those kinds of expectations, because he pays scrupulous attention to the score, and most often does precisely what Chopin asks for. For example, he doesn't take all the liberties that a pianist like Arthur Rubinstein does. Rather, you get what Chopin actually wrote. & therefore, I can't imagine that if Chopin were around today to listen to both pianists that he wouldn't have preferred Ashkenazy over Rubinstein, because composers are like that, they want musicians to pay attention to their notations & markings & not to ignore them with some egotistical notion that they can do better than the composer. So, in that sense, Ashkenazy is very reverential towards Chopin, and I find his Chopin invaluable for that reason.

On the other hand, I know that some listeners feel that Ashkenazy's Chopin is too literal to the score (especially fans of Rubinstein, Cortot, & François, as I've noticed over the years). I don't think so. & I generally find him to be more poetic in Chopin than Maurizio Pollini, for instance, with whom Ashkenazy was often compared back in the 1970s & 80s (by the old Penguin Guide), when both pianists were recording a lot of Chopin's music. Though, of course, I do prefer Ashkenazy's playing of certain Chopin works over others (despite that I find him consistently excellent throughout his survey). For example, Ashkenazy is especially fine in his two recordings of Chopin's Berceuse, which I treasure. Granted, there are some great performances of this work from the past, such as those by Maryla Jonas & Harold Bauer, but there's only one pianist from the stereo era that I would rate as highly as Ashkenazy in the Berceuse and that is Ivan Moravec,

Ashkenazy 1, analogue: 



Ashkenazy 2, hybrid SACD: 



Moravec: 




Jonas: 



Bauer: 




Ashkenazy's analogue 24 Preludes for Decca are likewise exceptional, and again, for me, both Ashkenazy and Moravec offer two of the most outstanding recordings of these works from the stereo era (though here, I may slightly prefer Moravec):

Ashkenazy 1: 



Moravec 1 (1965): 



Moravec 2 (1976): 




Ashkenazy is also the only pianist to have ever recorded Chopin's entire solo opus in the actual order that every piano piece was composed, according to the month & year in Chopin's life. Some people may find that a novelty, but for me, it was one of the most fascinating recording projects of the LP era (courtesy of Decca/London). However, today, you can only buy Ashkenazy's Chopin cycle in the usual, boring way, with the various types of pieces, i.e., Nocturnes, Waltzes, Mazurkas, etc., all grouped together. I'd love for Decca to re-release Ashkenazy's LP cycle in the original jackets on CD, in the same program that Ashkenazy meant for his Chopin project to be heard. If they did, it would allow today's listeners to hear Chopin's works as a musical journey, in much the same way that we can listen to the autobiographical journey of Beethoven's 9 Symphonies or 16 String Quartets in succession.

There are also a number of very fine Soviet recordings from Ashkenazy's younger days, before he defected to the West. Almost anything that you can find from the young Ashkenazy is well worth hearing, IMO.






In addition, the recordings that he first made for Decca after defecting to London in the 1960s, and then becoming an Icelandic citizen in the early to mid-1970s are very worthwhile, and for me, represent some of the best recordings that Ashkenazy has made in his career:









https://www.amazon.com/Robert-Schum...enazy+ashkenazy&qid=1628721245&s=music&sr=1-9

Generally, I've liked his solo piano recordings a bit less after he became a conductor, which I think took his focus away from the piano. For example, his second digital survey of Beethoven's Late Piano Sonatas nos. 28-32 sounds to me like he's almost sight reading the music. Those recordings are among the most uninvolved performances that I've heard of these difficult, challenging works. However, his earlier analogue Beethoven cycle is much better. For example, his Appassionata from the earlier cycle is exceptional,






as is his beautiful Andante favori: 




One exception among Ashkenazy's conductor era piano recordings is his digital recording of Schubert's final D.960 sonata and "Wanderer Fantasy" for Decca, which gets underrated, in my opinion: 



. In fact, I think his Schubert in general gets slightly underrated, especially the early Decca recordings: 



.

https://www.amazon.com/Wanderer-Fan...zy+schubert+960&qid=1628721156&s=music&sr=1-1

Another exception are some of the recordings from his Schumann solo piano survey for Decca, such as a very fine Carnaval, & a slow but ultra poetic Davidsbündertänze,









https://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Pha...tanze+ashkenazy&qid=1628721203&s=music&sr=1-1

Ashkenazy used to be a wonderful pianist live in recital, too. I heard a fantastic concert from him in Philadelphia back in the mid-1980s, where he gave one of the best performances of Schumann's Carnaval that I've ever heard. He especially understood the noble spirit behind the final March of the league of David at the end of the piece, & I'd say better than most pianists I've heard in my life. It was a very exciting Carnaval, & I couldn't get it out of my mind for days afterwards. Of course, the studio recording isn't quite the same, but it does come close to replicating my memorable experience that night:





. 
https://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Car...kenazy+carnaval&qid=1628721368&s=music&sr=1-1
https://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Wor...umann+ashkenazy&qid=1628721405&s=music&sr=1-1

In addition, Ashkenazy live Chopin recitals have been exceptional, too, & are arguably preferable to his studio recordings of the same works. Such as the following concerts given in England, which were filmed by Christopher Nuppen (and were once also available on LP & CD in Japan, & likely in England, too):

Chopin, Two Nocturnes, Op. 27, & Piano Sonata in B minor, Op. 58: 



Chopin, Piano Sonata no. 2, Op 35: 



Chopin 24 Preludes: 




Plus, I would agree with others here that Ashkenazy is very good in the piano music of his native country--especially Prokofiev, Scriabin, & Rachmaninov (and particularly in the piano concertos with conductors Previn & Haitink).

As a conductor, I've probably most liked Ashkenazy in the music of Russian composers, as well, & again, particularly in Rachmaninov, Scriabin, & Prokofiev. However, some of his Sibelius has been exceptional, too. For instance, the Tapiola that Ashkenazy conducted with the Swedish Radio Symphony for Nuppen's documentary film on Sibelius remains one of the best performances I've ever heard of this late Sibelius masterpiece, despite that we only get an excerpt of the performance in the film (& I wish some label would release it on CD!!!):






However, at other times, Ashkenazy's Sibelius has slightly disappointed me, such as his recent Exton cycle, which sounds great for its 'state of the art' audiophile engineering, but the performances aren't overly special, IMO. Ashkenazy's Sibelius can also sometimes sound a bit too much like Tchaikovsky for my tastes. But he does have an undeniable affinity for Sibelius. & I treasure the following documentary film detailing Ashkenazy's visit to Ainola, Sibelius's home, & to an art exhibit in Helsinki--shot in HD!!, which leaves his deep devotion to the great Finnish master in no question (being a Sibelius nut, I've watched & enjoyed this film numerous times):






P.S. We also have Ashkenazy to thank for commissioning Finnish composer Einojuhani Rautavaara's Piano Concerto No. 3, "Gift of Dreams", which Ashkenazy premiered on record:


----------



## JohnP

Having already ridden into the lists as an Ashkenazy champion, Josquin13, I agree with your post in particulars and in the whole. As much as I admire and appreciate VA, I love Moravec--love him. He didn't record all of Chopin's music, but in music like the Ballades, Preludes, Nocturnes, many of the Mazurkas, the Scherzos, and much more, he was unequaled in the last half of the 20th century. Nobody has combined his taste, style, "hammerless" sound, singing legato, and depth of understanding. Thanks for mentioning him.

I heard Moravec twice. The first time, the host insulted him, and it wasn't a good experience. The second, though, was memorable. He played a Haydn Sonata, Janacek's On an Overgrown Path, and the Chopin Ballade No. 4, his favorite piece. In the reception line, I said something he liked, and he reached out and hugged me. Great genius is unique. There was never anyone like Moravec; there never will be.

Whenever I think of Ashkenazy, I come back to a short, virtually unknown, piece by Schubert: Hungarian Melody. It's lilting purity and simplicity are infectious. It demonstrates his self-effacing love and understanding for Schubert, the piano, and music itself. I'm including a link. Schubert also used the tune in his work for two pianos, Divertissement a la Hongroise. If you don't know it, it's a pleasure.

Hungarian Melody. Vladimir Ashkenazy





Divertissement a la Hongroise. Vladimir and Vovka Ashkenazy


----------



## wkasimer

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but Ashkenazy recorded a fine Mahler 3 for Decca, since reissued on Eloquence:


----------



## Malx

Josquin13 said:


> I think he's a great Chopin player. But not in the way that some of the old school Chopin pianists were, who took greater creative liberties with Chopin's scores (& many of those old recordings I treasure, too). As a listener, you can't approach Ashkenazy's Chopin with those kinds of expectations, because he pays scrupulous attention to the score, and most often does precisely what Chopin asks for. For example, he doesn't take all the liberties that a pianist like Arthur Rubinstein does. Rather, you get what Chopin actually wrote. & therefore, I can't imagine that if Chopin were around today to listen to both pianists that he wouldn't have preferred Ashkenazy over Rubinstein, because composers are like that, they want musicians to pay attention to their notations & markings & not to ignore them with some egotistical notion that they can do better than the composer. So, in that sense, Ashkenazy is very reverential towards Chopin, and I find his Chopin invaluable for that reason.
> 
> On the other hand, I know that some listeners feel that Ashkenazy's Chopin is too literal to the score (especially fans of Rubinstein, Cortot, & François, as I've noticed over the years). I don't think so. & I generally find him to be more poetic in Chopin than Maurizio Pollini, for instance, with whom Ashkenazy was often compared back in the 1970s & 80s (by the old Penguin Guide), when both pianists were recording a lot of Chopin's music. Though, of course, I do prefer Ashkenazy's playing of certain Chopin works over others (despite that I find him consistently excellent throughout his survey). For example, Ashkenazy is especially fine in his two recordings of Chopin's Berceuse, which I treasure. Granted, there are some great performances of this work from the past, such as those by Maryla Jonas & Harold Bauer, but there's only one pianist from the stereo era that I would rate as highly as Ashkenazy in the Berceuse and that is Ivan Moravec,
> 
> Ashkenazy 1, analogue:
> 
> 
> 
> Ashkenazy 2, hybrid SACD:
> 
> 
> 
> Moravec:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jonas:
> 
> 
> 
> Bauer:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ashkenazy's analogue 24 Preludes for Decca are likewise exceptional, and again, for me, both Ashkenazy and Moravec offer two of the most outstanding recordings of these works from the stereo era (though here, I may slightly prefer Moravec):
> 
> Ashkenazy 1:
> 
> 
> 
> Moravec 1 (1965):
> 
> 
> 
> Moravec 2 (1976):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ashkenazy is also the only pianist to have ever recorded Chopin's entire solo opus in the actual order that every piano piece was composed, according to the month & year in Chopin's life. Some people may find that a novelty, but for me, it was one of the most fascinating recording projects of the LP era (courtesy of Decca/London). However, today, you can only buy Ashkenazy's Chopin cycle in the usual, boring way, with the various types of pieces, i.e., Nocturnes, Waltzes, Mazurkas, etc., all grouped together. I'd love for Decca to re-release Ashkenazy's LP cycle in the original jackets on CD, in the same program that Ashkenazy meant for his Chopin project to be heard. If they did, it would allow today's listeners to hear Chopin's works as a musical journey, in much the same way that we can listen to the autobiographical journey of Beethoven's 9 Symphonies or 16 String Quartets in succession.
> 
> There are also a number of very fine Soviet recordings from Ashkenazy's younger days, before he defected to the West. Almost anything that you can find from the young Ashkenazy is well worth hearing, IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, the recordings that he first made for Decca after defecting to London in the 1960s, and then becoming an Icelandic citizen in the early to mid-1970s are very worthwhile, and for me, represent some of the best recordings that Ashkenazy has made in his career:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Robert-Schum...enazy+ashkenazy&qid=1628721245&s=music&sr=1-9
> 
> Generally, I've liked his solo piano recordings a bit less after he became a conductor, which I think took his focus away from the piano. For example, his second digital survey of Beethoven's Late Piano Sonatas nos. 28-32 sounds to me like he's almost sight reading the music. Those recordings are among the most uninvolved performances that I've heard of these difficult, challenging works. However, his earlier analogue Beethoven cycle is much better. For example, his Appassionata from the earlier cycle is exceptional,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> as is his beautiful Andante favori:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One exception among Ashkenazy's conductor era piano recordings is his digital recording of Schubert's final D.960 sonata and "Wanderer Fantasy" for Decca, which gets underrated, in my opinion:
> 
> 
> 
> . In fact, I think his Schubert in general gets slightly underrated, especially the early Decca recordings:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Wanderer-Fan...zy+schubert+960&qid=1628721156&s=music&sr=1-1
> 
> Another exception are some of the recordings from his Schumann solo piano survey for Decca, such as a very fine Carnaval, & a slow but ultra poetic Davidsbündertänze,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Pha...tanze+ashkenazy&qid=1628721203&s=music&sr=1-1
> 
> Ashkenazy used to be a wonderful pianist live in recital, too. I heard a fantastic concert from him in Philadelphia back in the mid-1980s, where he gave one of the best performances of Schumann's Carnaval that I've ever heard. He especially understood the noble spirit behind the final March of the league of David at the end of the piece, & I'd say better than most pianists I've heard in my life. It was a very exciting Carnaval, & I couldn't get it out of my mind for days afterwards. Of course, the studio recording isn't quite the same, but it does come close to replicating my memorable experience that night:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> https://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Car...kenazy+carnaval&qid=1628721368&s=music&sr=1-1
> https://www.amazon.com/Schumann-Wor...umann+ashkenazy&qid=1628721405&s=music&sr=1-1
> 
> In addition, Ashkenazy live Chopin recitals have been exceptional, too, & are arguably preferable to his studio recordings of the same works. Such as the following concerts given in England, which were filmed by Christopher Nuppen (and were once also available on LP & CD in Japan, & likely in England, too):
> 
> Chopin, Two Nocturnes, Op. 27, & Piano Sonata in B minor, Op. 58:
> 
> 
> 
> Chopin, Piano Sonata no. 2, Op 35:
> 
> 
> 
> Chopin 24 Preludes:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Plus, I would agree with others here that Ashkenazy is very good in the piano music of his native country--especially Prokofiev, Scriabin, & Rachmaninov (and particularly in the piano concertos with conductors Previn & Haitink).
> 
> As a conductor, I've probably most liked Ashkenazy in the music of Russian composers, as well, & again, particularly in Rachmaninov, Scriabin, & Prokofiev. However, some of his Sibelius has been exceptional, too. For instance, the Tapiola that Ashkenazy conducted with the Swedish Radio Symphony for Nuppen's documentary film on Sibelius remains one of the best performances I've ever heard of this late Sibelius masterpiece, despite that we only get an excerpt of the performance in the film (& I wish some label would release it on CD!!!):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, at other times, Ashkenazy's Sibelius has slightly disappointed me, such as his recent Exton cycle, which sounds great for its 'state of the art' audiophile engineering, but the performances aren't overly special, IMO. Ashkenazy's Sibelius can also sometimes sound a bit too much like Tchaikovsky for my tastes. But he does have an undeniable affinity for Sibelius. & I treasure the following documentary film detailing Ashkenazy's visit to Ainola, Sibelius's home, & to an art exhibit in Helsinki--shot in HD!!, which leaves his deep devotion to the great Finnish master in no question (being a Sibelius nut, I've watched & enjoyed this film numerous times):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. We also have Ashkenazy to thank for commissioning Finnish composer Einojuhani Rautavaara's Piano Concerto No. 3, "Gift of Dreams", which Ashkenazy premiered on record:


Josquin - your posts never cease to amaze me with their depth and detail - oh and they are generally the only posts I can take time to have a coffee break whilst reading


----------



## Mandryka

This is a great favourite of mine


----------



## Josquin13

JohnP said:


> Having already ridden into the lists as an Ashkenazy champion, Josquin13, I agree with your post in particulars and in the whole. As much as I admire and appreciate VA, I love Moravec--love him. He didn't record all of Chopin's music, but in music like the Ballades, Preludes, Nocturnes, many of the Mazurkas, the Scherzos, and much more, he was unequaled in the last half of the 20th century. Nobody has combined his taste, style, "hammerless" sound, singing legato, and depth of understanding. Thanks for mentioning him.
> 
> I heard Moravec twice. The first time, the host insulted him, and it wasn't a good experience. The second, though, was memorable. He played a Haydn Sonata, Janacek's On an Overgrown Path, and the Chopin Ballade No. 4, his favorite piece. In the reception line, I said something he liked, and he reached out and hugged me. Great genius is unique. There was never anyone like Moravec; there never will be.
> 
> Whenever I think of Ashkenazy, I come back to a short, virtually unknown, piece by Schubert: Hungarian Melody. It's lilting purity and simplicity are infectious. It demonstrates his self-effacing love and understanding for Schubert, the piano, and music itself. I'm including a link. Schubert also used the tune in his work for two pianos, Divertissement a la Hongroise. If you don't know it, it's a pleasure.
> 
> Hungarian Melody. Vladimir Ashkenazy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Divertissement a la Hongroise. Vladimir and Vovka Ashkenazy


JohnP, it was my pleasure. Yes!, I agree with you. I am a big fan of the late Ivan Moravec, both the man and the pianist! I recall hearing him play a recital at Carnegie Hall in the fall of 2001, several months after 911, when the city was still in the grips of the aftermath of that atrocity. At the last minute, Moravec changed his program for the recital, because he didn't feel that it was the right music to play for an audience that had just been through such a terrible tragedy. For me, that says a lot about who he was as a man & artist.

By the way, I've recently discovered that the concert he played that night was recorded via a bootleg: Here's a link, & I recall that the Janacek 1905 Sonata was not originally on the program (& had replaced a Haydn sonata), and hearing it again now, yes, I can understand why Moravec chose the work for that occasion.






Several years later, I was visiting the Princeton Record Exchange (in Princeton, New Jersey), and on that afternoon the classical section was virtually empty. However, as I made my way from composers A-Z along the long wall of CDs, I noticed a professorial looking man wearing a trench coat making his way towards me from Z-A. We met at the Mozart section & crossed paths, and to my great surprise, I suddenly noticed that it was Ivan Moravec!! I had just been listening to his CD from the "Great Pianists" series in the car on my way over to Princeton. What a coincidence! Regrettably, I immediately felt embarrassed because one of the (more deranged) employees in the record store was playing the most godawful heavy metal music I had ever heard. I mean, it literally sounded satanic, with Moravec in the store!

I then had the idea that if I ran out to my car, which wasn't parked far away, and got my Moravec recording, I could ask him to sign it. So I rushed to my car, and ran back, but when I got back inside the store, alas, he was gone. Apparently, the heavy metal music had driven him away. I then thought that maybe he was still around town, so I went back outside & checked the local bookstore, Starbucks, & looked in various restaurant windows, etc., but to no avail.

Of course, I then realized that he must be performing at the University, so I checked on the bulletins boards on Nassau Street for flyers, and found that yes, Moravec was indeed performing the Schumann Piano Concerto with the Princeton University Orchestra that night (& had been giving masterclasses on campus). So I went and bought a ticket, and later that evening enjoyed the concert. I ended up sitting near the stage, & afterwards, at his curtain call, Moravec looked down at me & our eyes met for a moment and he nodded with a smile. So, it seemed like he may have remembered me from the record store, or at least noticed that I was clapping more loudly than others. It was such an unexpected, serendipitous evening!

So, like you, I had the great pleasure of seeing Moravec play twice in my life.

As for his recordings, on the one hand, I agree with you about his wonderful, inimitable Chopin!, yet, at the same time, it's hard for me to declare any recording or recordings 'definitive' because (I know too many &) there's always another pianist or two or three who have likewise managed to make another great recording of a work. For example, I wouldn't want to be without Claudio Arrau's set of Nocturnes (nor Pires or Francois'...), nor Halina Czerny-Stefanska or Maryla Jonas in the Mazurkas, etc. But I certainly wouldn't want to be without Moravec's Chopin either! & I agree, it is unique and special.

In addition, I also treasure his Schumann Kinderszenen, Debussy Images Books 1 & 2!!, Ravel, Haydn, Mozart, Brahms, and of course his playing of Janacek & the other Czech composers--Suk, Korte, & Smetana.

Turning back to Ashkenazy--yes, I know & like the "Hungarian Melody" that you linked to. It's on one of the early Ashkenazy Decca recordings that I recommended in my post. But I hadn't heard the two piano "Divertissment a la Hongroise", which I enjoyed. So, thanks for the link!

P.S. Do you mind telling the story of how Moravec became "insulted" at the recital you attended? As you've piqued my curiosity.


----------



## Josquin13

Malx writes, "Josquin - your posts never cease to amaze me with their depth and detail - oh and they are generally the only posts I can take time to have a coffee break whilst reading."

Malx, I'm glad to be on hand for your coffee breaks! & thanks for your kind words, which I appreciate. I hope that your breaks give you the time to also hear some of the musical links provided in my posts, because they're far more interesting (& carefully chosen) than my usual lengthy ramblings or walls of text...


----------



## JackRance

Ashkenazy is one of my favorite pianists and I suggest you to watch his documentary. But as a conductor he's not good...


----------



## 1846

On an almost but not quite totally unrelated note, Ashkenazy has a great nephew, 13 year old David Chen, who is starting to get some notice as a pianist. The young man also has the good fortune, in addition to being an Ashkenazy, of being the grandson of Martha Argerich. Some people have all the luck.


----------



## JTS

Very fine pianist. Had the pleasure of watching him give a concert of Mozart piano Concertos and also conduct a symphony. He also had the good sense to retire before he lost his pianistic powers


----------



## golfer72

Thats a great Documentary on Sibelius. i liked the way they incorporated a lot of his solo piano works into it which of course he is not known for.


----------



## OCEANE

Many years ago, Vladimir Ashkenazy introduced to me the profound meaning in Beethoven piano sonatas and he is always my respectful pianist. I also like his Rachmaninoff piano concertos very much not because of his flawless technique but his interpretation so balance without too dramatic or extravagance (there are many good performances of Rach. of course).

In recent years, Ashkenazy turns his attention to Bach and recorded WTC, partitas, French suites and lately English suites, and received very positive comments as I noted. Being a Bach-keyboard-music lover, I wish I like my respected pianist's performance but I find Ashkenazy's playing is always too fast if not rush (I believe in rather slow tempo in Bach's keyboard music). His approaches fail to display the inner world of the music that is brought out in others' playing such as Koroliov, Richter or Hewitt. I'm disappointed indeed.


----------



## bigfatchords

I very much like his recording of Ravel's Gaspard de la nuit. I have several recordings of it, and I would say Ashkenazy's is my favorite. His 'Scarbo' is both intense and powerful, with a measured tempo that enhances the grandeur of the work.


----------

