# Favorite recording of the Beethoven sonatas?



## Ravellian

I would post this on the keyboard forum... but it's slow as hell. So..

After having list*e*ned to many, many different notable pianists tackle the sonatas, including Alfred Brendel, Idil Biret, Richard Goode, and others, I have come to the conclusion that the ultimate interpreter of Beethoven's sonatas, to this day, is John O'Conor. Why?

1. His technique is so impeccable that he makes everything, even the most difficult passages, sound incredibly easy. He'll never make you nervous-he has complete control over every section.
2. The melodic line is ALWAYS incredibly clear and sweet. It's really beautiful how he always manages to make every line sound so perfect..
3. His playing style is always appropriate to the individual piece. The anguished and energetic sonatas (Appassionata, Pathetique, Waldstein, Op. 111, etc) are intensely dramatic, and generally at fast tempos. The others are appropriately lyrical and relaxed ("Hunt", Pastoral, Op. 110, etc). 
4. It rarely gets thunderously loud. There's a tendency by many pianists to bang on the piano as hard as they can whenever there's a forte or fortissimo.. context counts, people. Plus, these sonatas were written for the fortepiano, a quieter instrument than the modern piano. O'Conor understands this and maintains an element of restraint throughout the piece, so that when the music really _does_ require fff playing, the effect is extremely dramatic in contrast.

So, if you haven't heard this guy (and most people I know haven't), definitely give him a try. I particularly recommend his performances of the "Appassionata" and the "Waldstein" to start with.


----------



## Taneyev

I choose Gulda for the earlies, Horowitz for the middles, and Solomon for the lasts.


----------



## Lukecash12

Solomon and Sofronitsky all the way. Sofronitsky for the one's we do have of him (I'm not sure why, but he always pans out to be my favorite interpreter of every piece he plays). And Solomon for the rest.


----------



## Sorin Eushayson

Paul Badura-Skoda. His original cycle (Astree label, long out of print) is the most consistent to these ears.


----------



## SalieriIsInnocent

Vladmir Ashkenazy - The Piano Sonatas
Maria Pires and Augustin Dumay - The Violin Sonatas

Recommend and love both sets. Augustin Dumay is one of the finest violinists of all time, without being to showy.


----------



## jhar26

I love Emil Gilels' recordings of the piano sonatas.


----------



## nickgray

Annie Fischer and Jeno Jando.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio

I love Brendel, Kempff, and Gulda. I would also second the Gilels recommendation.


----------



## Artemis

I have several sets but rarely listen to any of them all the way through, as quite a few of individual sonatas don't interest me as much as they once used to. Among the more famous sonatas (all of which I do still like) I would be hard-pressed to pick out one "best" set. I reckon that the best versions are:Pathetique: Gilels
Moonlight: Pletnev
Pastoral: Goode
Tempest: Gulda
Die Jaqd: Schnabel
Waldstein: Gilels
Appasionata: Barenboim
Fur Therese: Pollini
Les Adieux: Pollini
Hammerklavia: Solomon
No 30: Ashkenazy
No 31: Gulda
No 32: Pollini​I don't care for forte piano versions of these sonatas. Also, on the whole I don't care much for Brendel who I find is too plain-ordinary and contains no fire in any of it. Schnabel is extremely good (probably the best pianist overall) but the sound quality is not top notch.


----------



## Conor71

I own the complete sonatas by Barenboim on EMI, Brendel on Decca (digital recording) and have a disc of the "favourite" sonatas by Kempff - currently Brendel is my favourite: I like his approach and the sound on this recording .


----------



## handlebar

While no set is completely GREAT through and through, I do consider the Phillips set of Brendel as stunning. I listen to it more than my others. Solomon is great as an older set though. Gilels does well.

Jim


----------



## starry

Artemis said:


> I have several sets but rarely listen to any of them all the way through, as quite a few of individual sonatas don't interest me as much as they once used to. Among the more famous sonatas (all of which I do still like) I would be hard-pressed to pick out one "best" set. I reckon that the best versions are:Pathetique: Gilels
> Moonlight: Pletnev
> Pastoral: Goode
> Tempest: Gulda
> Die Jaqd: Schnabel
> Waldstein: Gilels
> Appasionata: Barenboim
> Fur Therese: Pollini
> Les Adieux: Pollini
> Hammerklavia: Solomon
> No 30: Ashkenazy
> No 31: Gulda
> No 32: Pollini​I don't care for forte piano versions of these sonatas. Also, on the whole I don't care much for Brendel who I find is too plain-ordinary and contains no fire in any of it. Schnabel is extremely good (probably the best pianist overall) but the sound quality is not top notch.


Yeh Schnabel. People did say he was the voice of Beethoven.


----------



## Weston

I only have the Andras Schiff set complete - the ones with the bizarre ink smears on the covers. I have other sonata recordings that are piecemeal, but the Schiff set offers a new clarity to my ears, not overly dramatized or bombastic, but still a bit quirky. He throws in a startling repeat of what most performers think of as mere introductory material in the _Pathetique_. It sounds so correct, one can never go back to hearing it the usual way.

These mostly live recordings are a bit noisy however.


----------



## Guest

handlebar said:


> While no set is completely GREAT through and through, I do consider the Phillips set of Brendel as stunning. I listen to it more than my others. Solomon is great as an older set though. Gilels does well.
> 
> Jim


Interesting to read your comments as I have just D/L the Brendel set I still have to burn to CD but am very keen to hear them, I have Ashkenazy full set and many other individuals, I also try to avoid complete sets as only a few will be great the rest ordinary.


----------



## scytheavatar

It's a pity Pollini has never released a complete Beethoven, I have always felt that he's the greatest Beethoven interpreter of all, even for the piano concertos.


----------



## nickgray

scytheavatar said:


> It's a pity Pollini has never released a complete Beethoven, I have always felt that he's the greatest Beethoven interpreter of all, even for the piano concertos.


He did record 25 sonatas. Almost complete cycle. Still, I too wish he'd did a whole thing. Although I think of him as more of a Chopin guy...

Btw, recently DG released a great record of him playing the first part of Bach's WTC.


----------



## funper

I am rather faithful to Guldas' interpretations. I listen to them almost exclusively, mostly because my fondness of his recording of No. 32. I have some passionate memories associated with that particular recording and every time I hear it, it gives me a rather Proustian recollection of one episode of my childhood. Moreover, the recordings keep a high quality and Gulda has a refined sense of sensuality, which is a perquisite for an undertaking of this level (e.g. recording Beethoven's complete _sonate_). I have yet to find a recording of his that doesn't keep to these standards.


----------



## funper

By the way, a live recording of Pierre-Laurent Aimard playing No. 31 is extraordinary. I believed it was in a documentary he made about the making of a piano called _Note by Note: The Making of Steinway L1037_ (2007). It was not the first time I had heard this sonata but I was absolutely struck by his interpretation. Sadly, I have not heard it since and I have not been able to find it anywhere. I don't know how close Gulda comes to it, but it matters little. It is rare that any other interpretation captures the emotions one has upon discovering the real splendor of a sonata. It is a feat that can only be accomplished by the absolute first interpretation one hears, that is capable of revealing and unclothing the sublime beauty of the sonata. Anyone who has experienced this knows that you have an unexplainable tickling sensation down your spine. It's like having the order of the universe unfold before your eyes. It is, truly, almost a divine experience.


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth

Complete cycle?--Kempff.

Partial cycles?--Ohlsson, Schiff, Gilels, but most of all Glenn Gould: his Beethoven is _exquisite_!


----------



## Briano

*Paul Lewis*

How about Paul Lewis? Has anybody heard his cycle?


----------



## Aramis

Solomon - what a terrible piano timbre! :<<<

I didn't hear better Pathetique and Apassionata than Rubinstein's, Les Adieux too.


----------



## pianoman55

BARENBOIM- no question for me!


----------



## joen_cph

Current preferences are:
(These are all very personal performances and they often take liberties as regards a more conventional way of playing)

1 Schnabel 
2 Kuerti
3 Richter 1960 Leningrad masters
4 Richter 1974 Brilliant cd
5 Gould
6 Gould
7 Gilels Brilliant cd
8 Gould
9 Gould
10 Gould
11 Kuerti
12 Gould
13 Kovacevich EMI
14 Yudina (the sound is Schnabelesque, unfortunately)
15 Kuerti
16 Gould
17 Kuerti
18 Gould
19 Schnabel
20 Schnabel
21 Kovacevich EMI
22 Kuerti
23 Gilels Brilliant cd
24 Kovacevich EMI 
25 Schnabel 
26 Gilels Brilliant cd
27 Gilels Brilliant cd
28 Schnabel
29 Yudina + Kovacevich EMI 
30 Gould
31 Gould
32 Gould


----------



## Ravellian

To those who prefer Gould, what is it that you like about him? I have heard from several sources that his Beethoven playing is _awful_ and he should stick to Bach, but I have not personally heard him.


----------



## joen_cph

The recordings are very, very varied. The 14th and the 23rd sonatas are indeed awful IMO;
he plays the 1st movement of the Mondschein parodically fast, like a music-box gone mad, whereas the 23rd is played far too slow and still without much tension or without any feeling of releasing the music. The sonatas I mention above are still somewhat extreme but now as regards dramatizing the music, or, concerning sonatas 30+31, an extremely lyrical and singing tone, very far from the dryness he sometimes can have. In the 32nd he makes the first movement an intense drama likewise, probably the fastest recording ever, whereas the 2nd is supplied with strange rhythms - some meditative, sparkling sections and some faster ones that are very effective but sometimes come close to - boogie-woogie ! For a sample, I´d suggest sonatas 30,31,32. But those I mention above are all good, I think, and the result of comparing them to others, of course. I haven´t heard his Hammerklavier, but it is said to be disappointing by otherwise enthusiastic reviewers.
Perhaps Sebastian has some further comments ?


----------



## Yoshi

I would say Brendel or Barenboim for the whole cycle, but there are certain sonatas which I prefer Gould's version.



Ravellian said:


> To those who prefer Gould, what is it that you like about him? I have heard from several sources that his Beethoven playing is _awful_ and he should stick to Bach, but I have not personally heard him.


Maybe you should forget what a few people have said and listen to his recordings. Then see for yourself if you enjoy them or not


----------



## Ukko

Big boxes: Gilels in 'modern' sound (he didn't get the cycle done, but close enough), Schnabel in 'historical' sound - Pearl, Naxos or Dante.

Partials: Gulda up through Op. 33, and the 'lighter' sonatas after that. E. Fischer in the weighty sonatas and historical sound.


----------



## Webernite

Surprised Arrau hasn't been mentioned! He's an excellent pianist, although my first preference would still be for Gilels. I love many of Richter's Beethoven recordings, too. It's a shame about their sound quality.

Kempff and Brendel, names which often come up in these discussions, have never excited me so much. If I wanted to hear Beethoven played in a "Germanic" way, I would listen to Schnabel instead.

I am unfamiliar with Gulda's Beethoven. He does a good job with Bach, though of course he's no Glenn Gould. Perhaps I'll investigate.

Gould's own Beethoven is certainly inconsistent, but it's not all bad. He knew the last three sonatas very well indeed. His Hammerklavier is totally distinctive, and wonderful in its own way.  He _loved_ the early sonatas, but his performances of those have never much appealed to me. On the other hand, I do like his performances of the piano concertos and of the Bagatelles Op. 126.


----------



## emphazis

I would suggest Mikhail Mordvinov.


----------



## hoodjem

My A list for recordimgs of the Beethoven Piano Sonatas:

Schnabel (various labels)
Arrau (Phi)
Goode (None)
Gilels (incompl.: 29) DG


----------



## hoodjem

pianoman55 said:


> BARENBOIM- no question for me!


Which?

EMI or DG?


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

Arrau was my first set, and I'd still say he plumbs the emotional/philosophical depths of this music like few others. I also love Gilels and many of the Richter recordings I have. Kempff is a great alternative to the fiery, virtuostic approaches; extremely lyrical and musical. Pollini is also spellbinding in many of the more complex works. Really, I've yet to hear a genuinely "bad" set of these sonatas. It's such multi-faceted music that allows performers to bring out an immensely wide variety of shades, colors, textures, and meanings.


----------



## Captainnumber36

I also really enjoy Brendel, but it's so un-Beethoven; he strips it of the madness and makes it somewhat elegant.


----------



## flamencosketches

Kempff and Schnabel are my favorites and I go back and forth on my preference, but I have to say Schnabel is the greater of the two. I love Gilels generally but not too big on his Beethoven. Gould had never impressed me in Beethoven , kind of surprised to see he's such a popular choice.

This praise has got me curious about John O'Conor. I like his album of John Field Nocturnes a lot.


----------



## Mandryka

funper said:


> By the way, a live recording of Pierre-Laurent Aimard playing No. 31 is extraordinary. I believed it was in a documentary he made about the making of a piano called _Note by Note: The Making of Steinway L1037_ (2007). It was not the first time I had heard this sonata but I was absolutely struck by his interpretation. Sadly, I have not heard it since and I have not been able to find it anywhere. I don't know how close Gulda comes to it, but it matters little. It is rare that any other interpretation captures the emotions one has upon discovering the real splendor of a sonata. It is a feat that can only be accomplished by the absolute first interpretation one hears, that is capable of revealing and unclothing the sublime beauty of the sonata. Anyone who has experienced this knows that you have an unexplainable tickling sensation down your spine. It's like having the order of the universe unfold before your eyes. It is, truly, almost a divine experience.


The Aimard is on a DVD called legato, it's very good, especially in the second fugue.

Gulda is variable I think, he's memorable in op 110 on this CD


----------



## Dimace

*Annie Fischer *
………………………………..
Rudolph Buchbinder
Daniel Barenboim 
Andras Schiff 
Claudio Arrau.

END


----------



## Brahmsianhorn

Schnabel
Solomon
Gilels
Backhaus
Kempff


----------



## regnaDkciN

Any love for Levit? He seems to be the latest critics' darling.


----------



## Rogerx

regnaDkciN said:


> Any love for Levit? He seems to be the latest critics' darling.


Love the set, love him or load him but the critics can't be all wrong.

Editor's Choice
Gramophone Magazine
Awards Issue 2019
Editor's Choice
Instrumental Choice
BBC Music Magazine
December 2019
Instrumental Choice
Presto Recordings of the Year
Finalist 2019
Nominee - Best Collection
International Classical Music Awards
2019
Nominee - Best Collection
Classical Album of the Year
The Times Records of the Year
2019
Classical Album of the Year
Presto Recording of the Week
20th December 2019
The New York Times
Recordings of the Year 2019


----------



## Enthusiast

Like with Beethoven's symphonies and quartets I need more than one or two sets in my collection. Kempff and (Annie) Fischer are the foundation. Schnabel is somehow always fresh. Levitt is very good. And I get a lot of pleasure and satisfaction from Brautigam. There are at least six more sets (and loads more individual recordings) that I listen to quite often. If I could only have one I would demand two and choose Fischer and Kempff. If you are not familiar with those then stop what you are doing and give them a week each.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

One more time, in descending order:

Gilels (who woulda thunk it...)
A. Fischer
Schnabel
Lortie
Kovacevich
Brendel Decca
Arrau
Pollini

Honestly I don’t really get the interest in owning so many complete cycles when there are so many incredible individual recordings or half-complete cycles by Solomon, Serkin, E. Fischer, Gould, Richter, etc. that it’d be a shame to ignore these. 

I love Kempff’s unfussy and uniquely beautiful pianism in Brahms, Bach and Schubert, but I haven’t been able to get into his rather crudely-recorded stereo Beethoven cycle. Is the mono cycle a better bet in general?


----------



## Animal the Drummer

In my book, certainly. Besides the question of sound, his pianism in the earlier set has a freshness I don't think he quite achieved - at least not equally consistently - in its successor.


----------



## premont

Allegro Con Brio said:


> One more time, in descending order:
> 
> Gilels (who woulda thunk it...)
> A. Fischer
> Schnabel
> Lortie
> Kovacevich
> Brendel Decca
> Arrau
> Pollini
> 
> Honestly I don't really get the interest in owning so many complete cycles when there are so many incredible individual recordings or half-complete cycles by Solomon, Serkin, E. Fischer, Gould, Richter, etc. that it'd be a shame to ignore these.
> 
> I love Kempff's unfussy and uniquely beautiful pianism in Brahms and Bach, but I haven't been able to get into his rather crudely-recorded stereo Beethoven cycle. Is the mono cycle a better bet in general?


I do not understand what you mean with "crudely-recorded stereo LvB cycle". On my system it sounds at least fully acceptable and most often much better than that. It is true, that the mono version - despite mono - has a generally better sound.

Kempff is more vital and technically assured in the mono set, but I doubt they differ enough in that respect, so that the mono may convert you to Kempff, when the stereo didn't.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

premont said:


> I do not understand what you mean with "crudely-recorded stereo LvB cycle". On my system it sounds at least fully acceptable and most often much better than that. It is true, that the mono version - despite mono - has a generally better sound.
> 
> Kempff is more vital and technically assured in the mono set, but I doubt they differ enough in that respect, so that the mono may convert you to Kempff, when the stereo didn't.


The stereo sound seems unusually harsh, hissy, and xylophone-like for 1965.


----------



## wkasimer

Allegro Con Brio said:


> The stereo sound seems unusually harsh, hissy, and xylophone-like for 1965.


Which issue do you have? IIRC, the original CD issue...









...sounded pretty poor, but the second CD issue...









...sounded better. I don't recall the details; I didn't keep either one, since I'm not a fan.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

wkasimer said:


> Which issue do you have? IIRC, the original CD issue...
> 
> View attachment 138537
> 
> 
> ...sounded pretty poor, but the second CD issue...
> 
> View attachment 138538
> 
> 
> ...sounded better. I don't recall the details; I didn't keep either one, since I'm not a fan.


Well, I am probably the only person here who doesn't own a single CD - all streaming for me. But thanks for the pointer.


----------



## premont

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Well, I am probably the only person here who doesn't own a single CD - all streaming for me. But thanks for the pointer.


I own three different DG CD incarnations of Kempff's stereo set (also owned the original LP set), and it never struck me, that the first CD release was in particularly poor sound. I will have to think about this, the next time I listen to it.


----------



## Cortot

Kempff, Elly Ney, Yves Nat, Gieseking, Maria Grinberg, Schanbel, Backhaus, Myra Hess, Annie Fischer, Serkin.

A few pieces that are not set: Josef Hofmann, Josef Labor, Harold Bauer.


----------



## UniversalTuringMachine

We can't live in the past forever so I am going to recommend some great modern cycles: Bavouzet, Igor Levit, Paul Lewis, and Jonathan Biss are all fresh and excellent.

For the classics, Schnabel is a must, Serkin never disappoints, mono Kempff for the spontaneity, and Gilels for that golden tone.


----------



## Pat Fairlea

Gilels, Arrau ... Brendel now and then. Annie Fischer.
I have been listening to Gieseking's Beethoven more of late, and his playing is definitely growing on me.


----------

