# Murray Perahia



## Nickmb (Feb 16, 2019)

I’ve recently heard his great recording of Handel and Scarlatti, made in the mid 90s but sounding really fresh. I normally prefer this music on the harpsichord, eg Scott Ross for Scarlatti and Trevor Pinnock for Handel, but it doesn’t take long to get hooked by the sheer beauty of the playing and of course the absolutely flawless technique. Despite its age I would highly recommend this to anyone who hasn’t listened yet


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Nickmb said:


> I've recently heard his great recording of Handel and Scarlatti, made in the mid 90s but sounding really fresh. I normally prefer this music on the harpsichord, eg Scott Ross for Scarlatti and Trevor Pinnock for Handel, but it doesn't take long to get hooked by the sheer beauty of the playing and of course the absolutely flawless technique. Despite its age I would highly recommend this to anyone who hasn't listened yet


I've got this. Really fine playing


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Nickmb said:


> I've recently heard his great recording of Handel and Scarlatti, made in the mid 90s but sounding really fresh. I normally prefer this music on the harpsichord, eg Scott Ross for Scarlatti and Trevor Pinnock for Handel, but it doesn't take long to get hooked by the sheer beauty of the playing and of course the absolutely flawless technique. Despite its age I would highly recommend this to anyone who hasn't listened yet


I agree with DavidA, it's mighty fine, just like many other things he recorded.


----------



## Guest002 (Feb 19, 2020)

Best piano Goldbergs I know of (the Gould fans can pipe down a bit in the back there!!)

Interesting side-fact: Perahia was mentored by Benjamin Britten to be Peter Pears' new accompanist, after his heart operation and mini-stroke left him unable to do the job himself.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Big fan of Perahia. I get a sense of purity in his playing of Bach. I really liked the English Suites in his hands.

Am I correct that he has never recorded the Well Tempered Clavier? I wish he would.


----------



## mrdoc (Jan 3, 2020)

I have been a fan of his for a long time cant say much more, the only thing that shook me was when I first heard him speak in an interview, what an accent is it a New York accent?


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> View attachment 135773
> 
> 
> *Best piano Goldbergs I know of* (the Gould fans can pipe down a bit in the back there!!)
> ...


They are very fine. I don't think they replace the Gould but certainly stand alongside as an alternative


----------



## Simplicissimus (Feb 3, 2020)

Here's where the triggered but polite HIPster says, "Ahem, yes, Perahia is also a superb performer of music that was written for the piano." And where oldsters having trouble coming to terms with their increasingly marginal place in the world say, "A recording made in the mid 1990s is old?"


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

mrdoc said:


> I have been a fan of his for a long time cant say much more, the only thing that shook me was when I first heard him speak in an interview, what an accent is it a New York accent?


Well according to Wiki he was born in New York and now lives in London. I can certainly hear an underlying American (couldn't really say New York or not) accent with a lot of English overlay. Also very proud that he has chosen our grey, rainy island to inhabit.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

I have liked Perahia recordings a lot. I remember he did Brandenburg concerto No 5 and thought it may have been the best modern recording I have heard to date. I brought Perahia name up in forum before and you could have heard a pin drop. I guess there are still those in majority (consensus) that Perahia is not exactly up there with those other names repeatedly brought up. Well, does not matter to me as I listen to what I like, and Perahia does Chopin, Schubert, Bach, Beethoven. and of course Handel.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Bigbang said:


> I have liked Perahia recordings a lot. I remember he did Brandenburg concerto No 5 and thought it may have been the best modern recording I have heard to date. I brought Perahia name up in forum before and you could have heard a pin drop. I guess there are still those in majority (consensus) that Perahia is not exactly up there with those other names repeatedly brought up. Well, does not matter to me as I listen to what I like, and Perahia does Chopin, Schubert, Bach, Beethoven. and of course Handel.


I don't see many mentions of Radu Lupu either. Are there temperamental similarities between Perahia and Lupu which do not score well in the comparison game? Not barnstorming enough? Too poetic? The recording they did together of Mozart 2 piano stuff was excellent.


----------



## Ekim the Insubordinate (May 24, 2015)

I really like his Bach recordings, and his recording of the Goldbergs is also my favorite. His Schubert Impromptus are also very good.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

He is certainly a highly proficient musician who eschews showmanship, produces beautiful sounds, and plays a large amount of repertoire impeccably. But I find his interpretations pretty shallow and glossy. I enjoy his Bach but it’s very smooth and pianistic, sometimes sacrificing the complexity of the counterpoint. His Mozart piano concerto set is probably the only other thing of his that, if I collected physical music, I would find indispensable to have on my shelf.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Eclectic Al said:


> I don't see many mentions of Radu Lupu either. Are there temperamental similarities between Perahia and Lupu which do not score well in the comparison game? Not barnstorming enough? Too poetic? The recording they did together of Mozart 2 piano stuff was excellent.


I have this with Schubert(Perahia/Lupu) 4 hands in F minor...my favorite. I have not come across any recordings of Lupu to buy second hand and he appears be reclusive so this makes it hard to know more about his talents.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Bigbang said:


> I have this with Schubert(Perahia/Lupu) 4 hands in F minor...my favorite. I have not come across any recordings of Lupu to buy second hand and he appears be reclusive so this makes it hard to know more about his talents.


I remember my parents were very keen on Lupu because he played in a chair, rather than on a stool. I think his Schubert is highly regarded in particular, although I cannot speak from personal experience.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> He is certainly a highly proficient musician who eschews showmanship, produces beautiful sounds, and plays a large amount of repertoire impeccably. But I find his interpretations pretty shallow and glossy. I enjoy his Bach but it's very smooth and pianistic, sometimes sacrificing the complexity of the counterpoint. His Mozart piano concerto set is probably the only other thing of his that, if I collected physical music, I would find indispensable to have on my shelf.


It's probably a failing in me, but I like pianistic. I mentioned in a post elsewhere about Perahia that everything he did was done in excellent taste. I also clarified that I meant that entirely as a compliment (and I do), but I understand that the flipside of taste might be seen as sacrificing something rugged or earthy or honest or whatever. Call me shallow, but I just like things tasteful.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> He is certainly a highly proficient musician who eschews showmanship, produces beautiful sounds, and plays a large amount of repertoire impeccably. But I find his interpretations pretty shallow and glossy. I enjoy his Bach but it's very smooth and pianistic, sometimes sacrificing the complexity of the counterpoint. His Mozart piano concerto set is probably the only other thing of his that, if I collected physical music, I would find indispensable to have on my shelf.


I get that opinions vary all across this forum. But, I generally never refer to artists using descriptions above as it means nothing to me. I do not confer meaning to artists but decide what a recording does for me. There are cases where artists miss notes and take liberties with the score or use various tempos (and all that) but it still comes down to taste.

I will address some other aspects later as I think "time" and "place" plays a role. A younger classical music fan may not warm to recordings that appeal to older fans, but this is not about historical vs modern or techniques of playing. I do think this forum is home to a lot of opinions that moves people to seek recordings but I have moved past that stage. I have looked up on Amazon or Penguin to look up recordings I am wondering about but I do not concern myself about opinions of how other people might view works or artists, and even composers.

Added on from edit: A better way to put it--I do not chase recordings based on any particular person's opinion. I do sense that members have deep knowledge of the music they listen to but I am not going to buy a recording just because I think they know something valid unless it really strikes me I should acquire it. And there are so many recordings of any piece generally that no one person can know the each recording so well though there are some who seem to get close for sure.

And one reason I like to browse the forum is even the new listeners give me some perspective on what I might like as I learn to read what they say about recordings even if my thoughts are different. So it is not about experience only but giving opinions honestly and I can sort of figure out what I might like or not. I think.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

I just listened to him do the first French suite, and it became clear to me what his trait is: he sounds calm and considered. That combined with a sweet piano tone and a tendency to let music sing.

I’m not sure what music would really thrive with this sort of treatment. Satie maybe - I don’t know if he’s recorded any Satie but I think he may be very good with it.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

I have generally liked Perahia; his way is never idiosyncatric and he is always at the service of the composer. That sometimes renders him vanilla compared to more individual players but never bad. My favorite of his many recordings is the Mendelssohn; I've never heard anyone else do it as well -- especially the vastly underrated and dramatic Sonata Op. 6.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Perahia leaves me cold as a soloist. His Mozart concerto recordings and his Beethoven cycle with Haitink/RCO however, are high up on 'my list'. I can't explain why this is the case.


----------



## Malx (Jun 18, 2017)

I believe there to be a beauty of sound created by Perahia allied to a service to the composer - he doesn't leave me with the impression of having listened to Perahia rather than having listened to what the composer wrote.
With regard to the disparity of opinions of his 'worth' could there be anything in the my thought that many listeners may be initially enamoured with Perahia's recordings but when they explore a work and look for something more from it often the result can be that other pianists can find a little more depth/soul in a piece.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

NLAdriaan said:


> Perahia leaves me cold as a soloist. His Mozart concerto recordings and his Beethoven cycle with Haitink/RCO however, are high up on 'my list'. I can't explain why this is the case.


For sure the conductor and orchestra play a role and the works as soloists are (in this case-piano) just the performer on a given day (some days you feel it or not as in sports) and what of the instrument? The oneness of the performer and the type of piano?

Of course he conducted the piano concertos and even back then he knew the music (70's) though I hear criticism it would have been better if someone conducted as he played but overall he really is good in the cycle. The Beethoven cycle has always been a favorite too.


----------



## Guest002 (Feb 19, 2020)

NLAdriaan said:


> Perahia leaves me cold as a soloist,


I wonder if that's why I like him doing solo Bach? You know, the 'cold, clinical precision' thing allying well with Bach's mathematical precision and clarity?


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

I'm intrigued by the idea that the performer being at the service of the composer might be a bad thing. If a performer is more at the service of the composer than another performer then wouldn't that be a style in its own right, and one which might well be valuable (- I won't say better)?
I don't see how it is inherently good for a performer to be at the service of someone other than the composer (most likely themselves), nor that that would make their individuality more valuable then the individuality represented by seeking to serve the composer.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

For me, Perahia is okay in Bach (sure beats Barenboim). I was quite disappointed in his Handel/Scarlatti disc. Overall, I'd say that he does not do well in the baroque idiom. Even so, I would want to hear a WTC from him; don't know if he will ever record it.

I do think he fits excellently with Mozart's music as well as Schubert's.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> I wonder if that's why I like him doing solo Bach? You know, the 'cold, clinical precision' thing allying well with Bach's mathematical precision and clarity?


This is probably in jest (is it?), but Perahia often leaves me cold precisely because he makes everything so warm and beautiful. "Beauty of sound in service of the composer" is an interesting concept, and one that certain very high-profile musicians utilized with great success (ahem, HvK, ahem). There are times when I just want to hear beauty of sound and times when I want to hear something deeper. As always just my perception...


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> I wonder if that's why I like him doing solo Bach? You know, the 'cold, clinical precision' thing allying well with Bach's mathematical precision and clarity?


With Bach, I have quite a diversity of preferred pianists, Gould, Richter, Sokolov & Gulda (WTK) for the colored interpretations, Pollini (WTK I), Brendel and Hewitt for perhaps a more clinical approach.

Of course, Bach sounds good with almost any musician, but Perahia compared with the others mentioned, just sounds flat and even dull (sorry). Pollini in his great recent WTK I (please, DG, let him record WTK II as well:tiphat recording maybe called clinical, but has great authority.

I just listened to some of Perahia's Handel suites, as they were recommended here. It was as if Perahia plays the piano as a harpsichord, a strange approach. There is not that much of Handel recorded on the piano. Actually, the only one I know is Richter/Gavrilov, with who I got to know and love this music. Again, Perahia is nowhere near Richter in these pieces.


----------



## DavidA (Dec 14, 2012)

Eclectic Al said:


> It's probably a failing in me, but I like pianistic. I mentioned in a post elsewhere about Perahia that everything he did was done in excellent taste. I also clarified that I meant that entirely as a compliment (and I do), but I understand that the flipside of taste might be seen as sacrificing something rugged or earthy or honest or whatever. Call me shallow, but I just like things tasteful.


I think Perahia might be thought of as the opposite to Glenn Gould, the one tasteful and fluid, the other earthy, rugged and full of surprises and things that delight and/or irritate and infuriate. So you pays your money.. I have both actually!


----------



## Guest002 (Feb 19, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> This is probably in jest (is it?), but Perahia often leaves me cold precisely because he makes everything so warm and beautiful. "Beauty of sound in service of the composer" is an interesting concept, and one that certain very high-profile musicians utilized with great success (ahem, HvK, ahem). There are times when I just want to hear beauty of sound and times when I want to hear something deeper. As always just my perception...


Someone mentioned Perahia leaving him 'cold'; Bach can have a certain mathematical purity about it. Maybe Perahia's approach to Bach matches that and that's what I like about him? I don't know. I've never stopped to analyse it, really.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

DavidA said:


> I think Perahia might be thought of as the opposite to Glenn Gould, the one tasteful and fluid, the other earthy, rugged and full of surprises and things that delight and/or irritate and infuriate. So you pays your money.. I have both actually!


Could be. I can't really be doing with Glenn Gould, although I can just about cope with his 1955 Goldbergs. I started listening to the WTC on Spotify after someone referring to it here, and I didn't get past about 15 seconds before I had to turn it off. Wilful was the word that sprang to mind. Maybe others love it. I have the Schiff set kicking around, but I can't help thinking that I would like to hear Perahia.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> Someone mentioned Perahia leaving him 'cold'; Bach can have a certain mathematical purity about it. Maybe Perahia's approach to Bach matches that and that's what I like about him? I don't know. I've never stopped to analyse it, really.


I agree with "mathematical purity", but that does not equal "cold" in my mind. In fact I find Bach's music to be the most expressive, heartwrenchingly emotional, and inviting that I know. I personally hear Perahia as bringing out those expressive qualities of Bach while somewhat glossing over the mathematical complexity. But you're right, too much analysis is ultimately futile. I'll have to revisit his Bach (which I haven't heard in a while) to come up with some fresh impressions.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> This is probably in jest (is it?), but Perahia often leaves me cold precisely because he makes everything so warm and beautiful. "Beauty of sound in service of the composer" is an interesting concept, and one that certain very high-profile musicians utilized with great success (ahem, HvK, ahem). There are times when I just want to hear beauty of sound and times when I want to hear something deeper. As always just my perception...


I guess I can't see that much is going to be deeper than "beauty of sound in service of the composer". I like that phrase.

On the depth point, it may be that the performer is wiser than the composer about the depths of the composer's work, but I think there is a lot of merit in the humility of a performer treating the composer as paramount.

When it comes to beauty, I don't think that has to mean pretty. I'm very partial to the Bartok string quartets (especially 3 and 4), for example, and there's plenty of scope in the word beauty to encompass wildness, savagery and digging in. If the result isn't beauty, in a wide sense, then I'm not sure I want to hear the interpretation.

So I'd perhaps go with beauty in the service of the composer as being as deep as it gets.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

DavidA said:


> I think Perahia might be thought of as the opposite to Glenn Gould, [who is] full of surprises .


I wonder if it's true that Perahia makes the music sound unsurprising and predictable. Some people feel very comfortable with that.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Eclectic Al said:


> I guess I can't see that much is going to be deeper than "beauty of sound in service of the composer". I like that phrase.
> 
> On the depth point, it may be that the performer is wiser than the composer about the depths of the composer's work, but I think there is a lot of merit in the humility of a performer treating the composer as paramount.
> 
> ...


It's very true that "beauty" does not have to mean "proper, safe, and glossy" and indeed can be communicated in a variety of ways, but I'm afraid to say that's exactly what I hear in Perahia much of the time. I do think we essentially agree on the role of "beauty" in conveying performance - but when "beauty" is reduced simplistically to pure surface veneer and sonic smoothness, I take exception. That being said Perahia plays things with a touch, phrasing, and technique that is universally tasteful and pleasing. He is certainly a "pianist's pianist" in that regard, and when I want to hear things played flawlessly in a rounded, legato style he's who I turn to.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> I wonder if it's true that Perahia makes the music sound unsurprising and predictable. Some people feel very comfortable with that.


I suppose when you're talking about recordings, any recording will be predictable if you listen to it often enough. In the case of Bach, as an example, the question of ornaments will arise. With a recording they will, in the end, be predictable because you have heard the same recording so often (and the same applies to rhythmic variations, etc). The question surely is, do they seem right to you? I think Perahia's seem right.
With HvK having been raised, I mentioned in that thorny area, that maybe there was a difference between people who listened to a lot of live music (and wanted a one-off experience) and people who listened exclusively to recordings (who wanted something they could return to repeatedly). This may have been watered down a bit by streaming services (where you can almost regard recordings as live one-offs from a personal perspective), but I think there is something in this. I want a recording I can return to again and again and live with, and I want it to sound right, as its ability to surprise is a wasting asset.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> It's very true that "beauty" does not have to mean "proper, safe, and glossy" and indeed can be communicated in a variety of ways, but I'm afraid to say that's exactly what I hear in Perahia much of the time. I do think we essentially agree on the role of "beauty" in conveying performance - but when "beauty" is reduced simplistically to pure surface veneer and sonic smoothness, I take exception. That being said Perahia plays things with a touch, phrasing, and technique that is universally tasteful and pleasing. He is certainly a "pianist's pianist" in that regard, and when I want to hear things played flawlessly in a rounded, legato style he's who I turn to.


I now feel flattered. As a very poor pianist indeed, I have at least alighted on a pianist's pianist! He is probably my favourite, and my second favourite is probably Gilels. Would it be worth having a Gilels versus Richter thread? I suspect there's something about people's psychology that will push them into one camp or the other. They're both great, of course, but a lot of psychometric tests are about trying to force people to make choices between two things that are difficult to choose between, because that can reveal something about their personality.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Eclectic Al said:


> I now feel flattered. As a very poor pianist indeed, I have at least alighted on a pianist's pianist! He is probably my favourite, and my second favourite is probably Gilels. Would it be worth having a Gilels versus Richter thread? I suspect there's something about people's psychology that will push them into one camp or the other. They're both great, of course, but a lot of psychometric tests are about trying to force people to make choices between two things that are difficult to choose between, because that can reveal something about their personality.


Well, as Gilels and Richter are tied for my personal favorite pianists, it would be impossible for me to choose! It's interesting because for me, the Russian piano school is the complete opposite of the Perahia mentality - muscle, passion, vigor, digging deep under the surface of the notes, playing with a laser-sharp clarity that reveals the structural profundity of the music in brilliant colors. I think it comes down to whether you see the music as "pure" - i.e. it doesn't require any extraneous interpretation and should be allowed to speak for itself - or as a "tabula rasa" upon which the performer must inject personality and meaning.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Well, as Gilels and Richter are tied for my personal favorite pianists, it would be impossible for me to choose! It's interesting because for me, the Russian piano school is the complete opposite of the Perahia mentality - muscle, passion, vigor, digging deep under the surface of the notes, playing with a laser-sharp clarity that reveals the structural profundity of the music in brilliant colors. I think it comes down to whether you see the music as "pure" - i.e. it doesn't require any extraneous interpretation and should be allowed to speak for itself - or as a "tabula rasa" upon which the performer must inject personality and meaning.


Wow this is deep. I think perhaps it depends on the music. I love the Gilels disc of the Waldstein, Les Adieux and Appassionata, as an outstanding example, but that's Beethoven. For Bach I love the Perahia Goldberg and Suites (English and French).
I'm more a Bach person perhaps than a Beethoven one by temperament (being a mathematician by training), so perhaps I veer in the direction of things been done "as they should be". That might also be why I'm more a Gilels and a Richter fan, as I sense the Gilels is more disciplined, and Richter more free.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

AbsolutelyBaching said:


> Best piano Goldbergs I know of (the Gould fans can pipe down a bit in the back there!!)
> 
> Interesting side-fact: Perahia was mentored by Benjamin Britten to be Peter Pears' new accompanist, after his heart operation and mini-stroke left him unable to do the job himself.


I second that, edging out Schiff. I've always loved Perahia's playing overall.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Eclectic Al said:


> Wow this is deep. I think perhaps it depends on the music. I love the Gilels disc of the Waldstein, Les Adieux and Appassionata, as an outstanding example, but that's Beethoven. For Bach I love the Perahia Goldberg and Suites (English and French).
> I'm more a Bach person perhaps than a Beethoven one by temperament (being a mathematician by training), so perhaps I veer in the direction of things been done "as they should be". That might also be why I'm more a Gilels and a Richter fan, as I sense the Gilels is more disciplined, and Richter more free.


Yup. Gilels is usually fairly straightforward and doesn't care to indulge in Richter's rubato and other expressive liberties, but there's something about the way Gilels interprets the notes that strikes me right in the heart. I can't say I know what exactly it is, but that's the unexplainable beauty of music!

BTW I rate Perahia's Goldbergs underneath Tureck, Schiff, and _maybe_ Gould '81 but _definitely_ over Gould '55 which I must say is a recording I simply despise.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> BTW I rate Perahia's Goldbergs underneath Tureck, Schiff, and _maybe_ Gould '81 but _definitely_ over Gould '55 which I must say is a recording I simply despise.


I'd agree about Gould. I love the contrapuntal clarity of his playing but the "look at me" quirkiness (senseless hyper-speed or excruciating slowness) is too much.


----------



## Taplow (Aug 13, 2017)

Eclectic Al said:


> I don't see many mentions of Radu Lupu either. Are there temperamental similarities between Perahia and Lupu which do not score well in the comparison game? Not barnstorming enough? Too poetic? The recording they did together of Mozart 2 piano stuff was excellent.


I find Radu Lupu to be weirdly idiosynchratic, a bit like a piano version of Mischa Maisky, whereas Perahia strives for perfection above personality. Having said that, the two work strangely very well together on some of the recordings for four hands (or two pianos) that they have produced.

I admire Perahia for the same reason I admire Truls Mørk (speaking of cellists), namely flawless technique. But Perahia brings something additional to the table, and that is an innate, lyrical sensitivity. His renditions of Mendelssohn's Lieder ohne Worte combine both to produce a recording that blows others out of the water for me. Other dearly loved recordings in my collection include his Mozart piano concerto cycle, and only Rosalyn Tureck has a deeper and warmer place in my heart for piano renditions of Bach.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Eclectic Al said:


> I suppose when you're talking about recordings, any recording will be predictable if you listen to it often enough. In the case of Bach, as an example, the question of ornaments will arise..


I think a lot depends on how the counterpoint is played, how much it is aligned. If the counterpoint is made complex, then there are levels of meaning exposed, which make the performance more susceptible to multiple listening.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Eclectic Al said:


> I suppose when you're talking about recordings, any recording will be predictable if you listen to it often enough. In the case of Bach, as an example, the question of ornaments will arise..


I think a lot depends on how the counterpoint is played, how much it is aligned. If the counterpoint is made complex, then there are levels of meaning exposed, which make the performance more susceptible to multiple listenings.

The alternative, and this is maybe the one of the qualities of Perahia's style, is that the music becomes very rapidly a pleasant and undemanding background. No surprises, no jolts, you know what's going to happen. That's one of the reasons he's so popular I think $$$$$$$$$$


----------



## BillT (Nov 3, 2013)




----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Mandryka said:


> I think a lot depends on how the counterpoint is played, how much it is aligned. If the counterpoint is made complex, then there are levels of meaning exposed, which make the performance more susceptible to multiple listenings.
> 
> The alternative, and this is maybe the one of the qualities of Perahia's style, is that the music becomes very rapidly a pleasant and undemanding background. No surprises, no jolts, you know what's going to happen. That's one of the reasons he's so popular I think $$$$$$$$$$


I find it fascinating how we've moved to a sort of Perahia equals von Karajan position. Those who are sceptical point to beauty of sound, superficiality and money. They also tend to suggest that likers of those artists lack something in their appreciation. I wasn't expecting the parallel. Odd.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Taplow said:


> Other dearly loved recordings in my collection include his Mozart piano concerto cycle, and only Rosalyn Tureck has a deeper and warmer place in my heart for piano renditions of Bach.


A major difference between Tureck's and Perahia's Bach is that she investigates every musical strand while Perahia simply plays the music in a comfortable fashion. He's way behind Tureck. My perspective is that Perahia's Bach is more for Perahia enthusiasts than Bach fans.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Eclectic Al said:


> Could be. I can't really be doing with Glenn Gould, although I can just about cope with his 1955 Goldbergs. I started listening to the WTC on Spotify after someone referring to it here, and I didn't get past about 15 seconds before I had to turn it off. Wilful was the word that sprang to mind. Maybe others love it. I have the Schiff set kicking around, but I can't help thinking that I would like to hear Perahia.


Hear that Perahia! What are you waiting on? We are not getting any younger either. Surely you studied Tureck and all the others too.

I have saying--a simple one too. If I can forget all other recordings when I listen to a new recording or not, it is good enough. I do not concern myself with semantics, just accept it.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

BillT said:


>


What is your point? We all had more hair back in the day! And the music is good too. One of the best.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Bulldog said:


> A major difference between Tureck's and Perahia's Bach is that she investigates every musical strand while Perahia simply plays the music in a comfortable fashion. He's way behind Tureck. My perspective is that Perahia's Bach is more for Perahia enthusiasts than Bach fans.


Yes, perhaps, or you have a more telepathic attunement with Tureck. Maybe it is not all about gray matter. Just as we click with people we click with our music via unknown means.......


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

I have enjoyed the phrases used here but let's not get carried away. I have heard that "perahia in the service of the composer before" but since there is not a patent on it or any copyright issues I am aware of, have at it, but I remember everything I read (or used to) and seems to me these phrases were used in describing Perahia in reviews in the past.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> A major difference between Tureck's and Perahia's Bach is that she investigates every musical strand while Perahia simply plays the music in a comfortable fashion. He's way behind Tureck. My perspective is that Perahia's Bach is more for Perahia enthusiasts than Bach fans.


How is "investigating every musical strand" different from playing "in a comfortable fashion"?


----------



## Nickmb (Feb 16, 2019)

Hm. I’ve looked at most of the replies and I’m beginning to wonder whether I should have joined this forum at all. There seems to be an awful lot of showing off and competition which I can’t take part in as I don’t have the encyclopaedic knowledge displayed by many of the participants. Just saying.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Nickmb said:


> Hm. I've looked at most of the replies and I'm beginning to wonder whether I should have joined this forum at all. There seems to be an awful lot of showing off and competition which I can't take part in as I don't have the encyclopaedic knowledge displayed by many of the participants. Just saying.


I'm one of the ignorant ones too. I just assume the others know what they're talking about, and use it to identify pieces and performers it might be worth checking out.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

consuono said:


> How is "investigating every musical strand" different from playing "in a comfortable fashion"?


Well, I was just trying to use moderate language. Feel free to replace the comfortable phrase with "superficial manner".


----------



## Gray Bean (May 13, 2020)

Still one of my favorite Beethoven cycles...Concertgebouw Orchestra/Haitink


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> Well, I was just trying to use moderate language. Feel free to replace the comfortable phrase with "superficial manner".


Well I do think Tureck's recordings are sometimes unjustly overlooked, and they're excellent too. The primary difference that I hear in the DG Tureck recording I'm familiar with (I don't know if there's more than one) is that her tempi are often slower and more relaxed, and that's terrific too and a valid approach. Perahia's recording may be "flashier", but many of the Goldergs are intended to be "flashy" and virtuosic. Although not at Gould's 1955 breakneck pace...to my tastes anyway. I do think it's a shame that Gould and not Tureck got most of the limelight. I guess quirkiness has its advantages marketing-wise.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

^I love Tureck’s patient, spiritual unfolding of the Goldbergs for when I want to luxuriate for a long time in Bach’s universe. Gould ’81 still has flashiness, but I think he’s a lot more sensitive to the music than the ’55. I still get annoyed at how he plays every variation with the same touch like a harpsichord, which can get grating after a while, and his wishy-washy employment of repeats (take ‘em all or take only the first half repeat in each variation). Schiff is a good compromise between the two I think.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Schiff is a good compromise between the two I think.


The Decca version or the ECM (or both)?


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Bulldog said:


> The Decca version or the ECM (or both)?


If memory serves me right Bulldog like the ECM version better than Decca. I own the Decca version--I like it. I also have Barenboim on Erato, like that too. Glenn Gould....from time to time. Deryk Lim..not bad, Perahia...pretty good. Feltsman..live version..yep.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Bulldog said:


> The Decca version or the ECM (or both)?


Forgot about the earlier one...only heard the ECM.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Forgot about the earlier one...only heard the ECM.


Schiff's ECM Goldbergs captures more exuberance than in any other version I know - a wonderful listening experience.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Nickmb said:


> Hm. I've looked at most of the replies and I'm beginning to wonder whether I should have joined this forum at all. There seems to be an awful lot of showing off and competition which I can't take part in as I don't have the encyclopaedic knowledge displayed by many of the participants. Just saying.


Don't feel that way. Yes there's some preening and posing every now and then on a forum like this. I'll be the first to admit though that I'm not a musicologist or really an audiophile with extensive (and expensive) audio equipment with thousands of recordings. But I'm a pretty good (though amateur) pianist and I'm learning the cello... and the music I love I know very well. If you have a passion for a composer or several, or for a form of music, or for one or more instruments, chime in anyway. Don't let some potential flaming stop you.


----------



## Allegro Con Brio (Jan 3, 2020)

Nickmb said:


> Hm. I've looked at most of the replies and I'm beginning to wonder whether I should have joined this forum at all. There seems to be an awful lot of showing off and competition which I can't take part in as I don't have the encyclopaedic knowledge displayed by many of the participants. Just saying.


Stick around! When it comes down to it we're all just here to discuss and learn about great music. We have members with all sorts of interests and experience levels here. Insufferable nerds like me do tend to use the forum as a medium for venting our irrational hoards of knowledge and our intense interests, but I sure wish I was a member when I was first getting into CM so I could learn from those with more knowledge (which I still do to a great extent). No matter what your goals in music listening are, I guarantee you'll find something valuable here


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> ...but I sure wish I was a member when I was first getting into CM so I could learn from those with more knowledge (which I still do to a great extent). ...


Well yeah, that's a good point. There are those here who are professional musicians and can give insights into performance issues or technique; there are some who really are hardcore audiophiles with thousands of recordings, and their reviews of this or that recording or performer can be interesting. Anyway, Nickmb, your OP was good and on point and you got pretty much general agreement, which is more than most of us get. :lol: These things can veer off into other subjects though, like which recording of the Goldberg Variations is better. :lol:. No need to be intimidated.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Just listen to this one (Richter's 'authorised recordings' Bach) in comparison with Perahia. Leave the WTK and Goldberg's alone for a while. I guess you will find a favorite easy, as there is quite a difference between the poetic Richter and the impersonal Perahia.

I don't follow the words 'mathematical' when listening to Perahia. It is mere 'weak' then 'mathematical', Perahia leaves no impression. I still think that Gould is the most 'mathematical' or 'analytical' Bach player around, like it or not.

I wonder if any of you have heard Jeremy Denk, who to me sounds as a much better version of Perahia in 'his' Goldberg's.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Well, I just just listened to some bits of the first English suite, Richter and Perahia. Insofar as I'm qualified to judge (a bit presumptuous) I thought they both sounded like they could play the piano quite well. I would be happy to listen to either.

What I didn't get was any sense that one was way more impersonal and the other way more poetic, or any of the other dichotomies that are suggested. It is interesting in this thread that Perahia has been criticised by some for being too objective and mathematical or considered, and by others for being too poetic or lyrical and not objective or mathematical enough. That says to me that we are in the realms of personal taste and blind listenings would also be interesting to separate the style from the name.

I suppose I'll just have to resign myself to being superficial. My main feeling with this is that there are various pianists who can play this stuff really well, and they have their differences, but it is not for me to say one is better or worse than the other, as their depth of understanding of the music and the performance realities is in a different league to mine. I trust that they are sufficiently competent to get the outcome they seek, and sufficiently knowledgeable that that outcome is one they have judged as valid. All I can do it listen to ones I like, and avoid ones I don't.

For me, I'm afraid the avoid group often includes Gould, because I can't be doing with what seems to be a tendency towards "it's me, Glenn" mannerisms. If I am going to listen to something for 1 hour, which I am wont to do with this sort of stuff, then it ruins the whole 1 hour for me if there is a "blot" in it, even if there are brilliant bits. Perhaps that's superficial of me, but what I want is for the whole thing to hang together coherently without any "what the ?*?*" moments. I am a mathematical type, and a proof fails if there is one step in it which doesn't work, even if other elements are hugely insightful. You have to go back and fix the misstep or the whole thing collapses.


----------



## Taplow (Aug 13, 2017)

Bulldog said:


> A major difference between Tureck's and Perahia's Bach is that she investigates every musical strand while Perahia simply plays the music in a comfortable fashion. He's way behind Tureck. My perspective is that Perahia's Bach is more for Perahia enthusiasts than Bach fans.


That may be so. It is certainly true what you say about Tureck. But as for Perahia, I don't have the erudition to speak in absolutes. I only state what I personally feel when I hear the music.


----------



## staxomega (Oct 17, 2011)

Mandryka said:


> I think a lot depends on how the counterpoint is played, how much it is aligned. If the counterpoint is made complex, then there are levels of meaning exposed, which make the performance more susceptible to multiple listenings.
> 
> The alternative, and this is maybe the one of the qualities of Perahia's style, is that the music becomes very rapidly a pleasant and undemanding background. No surprises, no jolts, you know what's going to happen. That's one of the reasons he's so popular I think $$$$$$$$$$


I wonder if he would interpret JSB differently had he recorded them in his CBS years? I too don't like these 90s Sony and now DG recordings, too rounded over and lacking contrapuntal clarity. It is sort of unusual given how clear and angular he is in the Hammerklavier Sonata's last two movements, but a bit lacking in depth.

Andras Schiff is another who I find recorded mainstream easy listening JSB in his Decca years but now plays it in a way that is far more to my taste.

I think it is interesting, when I read modern interviews on pianists talk about JSB they very rarely talk in great detail about the fugal elements, the independent voices, etc. It is usually something more generic.

This probably reads like I'm looking for some pianist looking to interpret this in some HIP fashion transcribed to piano, I think nothing could be more boring. Two of the very best WTC I've heard in the last decade are Jorg Demus final 99/2000 recording and Andrei Vieru. The latter showing that you can play WTC with contrapuntal clarity yet still turn in emotional performances without things like over pedaling, utilizing large dynamic range swings and such.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Must have for Perahia fans.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Taplow said:


> That may be so. It is certainly true what you say about Tureck. But as for Perahia, I don't have the erudition to speak in absolutes. I only state what I personally feel when I hear the music.


What may be so? There is no way to investigate it one way or another. In the end the finger points back to the person making the claim.....each to their own.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

Eclectic Al said:


> Well, I just just listened to some bits of the first English suite, Richter and Perahia. Insofar as I'm qualified to judge (a bit presumptuous) I thought they both sounded like they could play the piano quite well. I would be happy to listen to either.
> 
> What I didn't get was any sense that one was way more impersonal and the other way more poetic, or any of the other dichotomies that are suggested. It is interesting in this thread that Perahia has been criticised by some for being too objective and mathematical or considered, and by others for being too poetic or lyrical and not objective or mathematical enough. That says to me that we are in the realms of personal taste and blind listenings would also be interesting to separate the style from the name.
> 
> ...


I am quite sure "blind" tests in a scientific setting would put an end to this idea that fancy words (keep the dictionary handy) would be mixed up between performers over and over. I have no doubt about that. That means that to many people are not aware of how and why they are listening and are biased on many levels. And I see it in the newbies, repeating the same mantras of the elders, looking for a way to move in a become a music critic. To be honest, I usually skim over posts that are on repeats (here we go again) and I figure others can read them.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

staxomega said:


> Two of the very best WTC I've heard in the last decade are Jorg Demus final 99/2000 recording and Andrei Vieru. The latter showing that you can play WTC with contrapuntal clarity yet still turn in emotional performances without things like over pedaling, utilizing large dynamic range swings and such.


I also find the Vieru WTC outstanding, and your description is spot-on. Two other wonderful WTC's that are in the Vieru camp come from Roger Woodward and Evgeny Koroliov.


----------



## Ekim the Insubordinate (May 24, 2015)

Nickmb said:


> Hm. I've looked at most of the replies and I'm beginning to wonder whether I should have joined this forum at all. There seems to be an awful lot of showing off and competition which I can't take part in as I don't have the encyclopaedic knowledge displayed by many of the participants. Just saying.


Nah - you'll get opinionated people, for sure. But don't feel like you need to be an expert. I'm not. I played saxophone for a few years in junior high band - that is the sum total of my musical expertise. I listen for what sounds great to me. My breadth simply comes from listening (and still isn't that broad) - but I subscribe to Apple music, so I don't have to buy everything, I just stream as much as I can (sadly, it looks like the Hyperion label is not to be found on Apple music, and it is one of my favorites, so those I have to buy).


----------



## Ekim the Insubordinate (May 24, 2015)

Rogerx said:


> Must have for Perahia fans.


Sony has put out, I believe, an even cheaper set.


----------



## perdido34 (Mar 11, 2015)

There are several Perahia recordings that I return to often:

Emperor Concerto
Hammerklavier
Chopin Etudes
Goldbergs, English Suites, French Suites, Partitas
Bach concertos for piano
Scarlatti & Handel disc (listening to the Scarlatti items right now!)

I like the Mozart concerto set, but I have other favorites.


----------



## NLAdriaan (Feb 6, 2019)

Bigbang said:


> I am quite sure "blind" tests in a scientific setting would put an end to this idea that fancy words (keep the dictionary handy) would be mixed up between performers over and over. I have no doubt about that. That means that to many people are not aware of how and why they are listening and are biased on many levels. And I see it in the newbies, repeating the same mantras of the elders, looking for a way to move in a become a music critic. To be honest, I usually skim over posts that are on repeats (here we go again) and I figure others can read them.


In the end, you will have to mention a certain preference when discussing any thread on a composer or interpreter. And we all have a different taste. So, if I am saying that I prefer A over B, it is just a matter of (my) taste. No one can argue with that. Of course, it maybe problematic if someone openly criticizes a piece or recording that you happen to love. But in the end it is all, just another opinion. And we are indeed all critics. But in the end, I often listen to a piece or interpretation that is highly recommended, just to find out what I think of it. So, I have discovered a lot of new stuff. And I of course also hope to convince others of my preferred recordings.

You will also find blind tests here sometimes. It is a bit of a hassle to set it up, would be nice if a tool would be available.


----------



## staxomega (Oct 17, 2011)

Bulldog said:


> I also find the Vieru WTC outstanding, and your description is spot-on. Two other wonderful WTC's that are in the Vieru camp come from Roger Woodward and Evgeny Koroliov.


These are both excellent as well. Michael Levinas is another more recent recording I've been quite taken with.

Dina Ugorskaja is one that is a bit too uneven for me from piece to piece but worth hearing.

I wish Youtube didn't require a phone number for uploads longer than 20 minutes, Jorg Demus' final recording really needs to be heard by a wide audience that Youtube allows. The way he weaves the voices in and out and spontaneous nature of his playing is something else. I sort of get how he recorded this three (or four?) times in his life, it's like WTC is in his blood, maybe that is what is in his spacer DNA.

Edit: IIRC we had some discussion on Tureck's DG vs BBC recordings some years back. I've come around to really loving those BBC recordings. The BBC are some of the first I reach for when I want to hear individual pieces.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

NLAdriaan said:


> In the end, you will have to mention a certain preference when discussing any thread on a composer or interpreter. And we all have a different taste. So, if I am saying that I prefer A over B, it is just a matter of (my) taste. No one can argue with that. Of course, it maybe problematic if someone openly criticizes a piece or recording that you happen to love. But in the end it is all, just another opinion. And we are indeed all critics. But in the end, I often listen to a piece or interpretation that is highly recommended, just to find out what I think of it. So, I have discovered a lot of new stuff. And I of course also hope to convince others of my preferred recordings.
> 
> You will also find blind tests here sometimes. It is a bit of a hassle to set it up, would be nice if a tool would be available.


Agree. What I am honing in on is that I think some reviewers do not own their interpretations in some cases. If someone is looking up to other reviewers and thinking--'oh, this performer is really great in this composer, I will listen and confirm my impression'--well, this is not exactly the best way to determine what is going on. Another thing is hopping around from one recording to another, hearing it and making bold statements. In many recordings it takes many listenings of a few recordings over and over to then get more of a sense when hearing a new recording.

So no disagreements but I stand by my opinion that reviewers are biased in a variety of ways based on knowing beforehand "who" it is. I personally do not engage in this type of activity. I listen for whatever pleases me. However, if someone values another person's opinion on Perahia, for example, and then turns around and agree with that person that Perahia is exactly what the other person states I get suspicious they are not owning their opinions but merely engaging in activity more with what they want out of the forum. Nuff said


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Bigbang said:


> ...
> So no disagreements but I stand by my opinion that reviewers are biased in a variety of ways based on knowing beforehand "who" it is. ...


I think the same thing has applied for generations to instruments: as in, there's nothing quite like that glorious sound of those 300 year old Italian instruments encrusted with the patina of historic craquelure...while several blind tests have suggested otherwise. Or, there's an audible difference among platinum, gold, silver or nickel flutes. The classical music world seems to be full of such stuff...which really hasn't helped it.


----------



## Judith (Nov 11, 2015)

Was hooked on Murray Perahia when I heard a recording by him on Classic FM and he can be quite addictive. Now have quite a few CDs of his. Love watching him on U Tube also. Doesn't have the facial contortions or acrobatics that some pianists seem to possess


----------



## Gallus (Feb 8, 2018)

Beautiful pianist, one of my very favourites. Nothing beats his recordings of Bach's keyboard suites for pure beauty and simple pleasure.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

consuono said:


> I think the same thing has applied for generations to instruments: as in, there's nothing quite like that glorious sound of those 300 year old Italian instruments encrusted with the patina of historic craquelure...while several blind tests have suggested otherwise. Or, there's an audible difference among platinum, gold, silver or nickel flutes. The classical music world seems to be full of such stuff...which really hasn't helped it.


Seems to me that audiophiles get worked up over extreme minute differences that I wonder if the average person or audiophile could detect the difference on remasterings on recordings. Some are a given but here again, no blind tests and prior knowledge can lead the mind to "hear" the difference. I think.


----------



## Josquin13 (Nov 7, 2017)

Allegro Con Brio said:


> I agree with "mathematical purity", but that does not equal "cold" in my mind. In fact I find Bach's music to be the most expressive, heartwrenchingly emotional, and inviting that I know. I personally hear Perahia as bringing out those expressive qualities of Bach while somewhat glossing over the mathematical complexity. But you're right, too much analysis is ultimately futile. I'll have to revisit his Bach (which I haven't heard in a while) to come up with some fresh impressions.


I agree. In his master classes, Murray Perahia has talked about playing Bach's keyboard music as a chorale, with each melody carrying a different emotion (in accordance to Bach's teachings), rather than something that is dry, analytic and purely mathematical:






As with all musicians, I find Perahia's playing style to be better suited to some composers than others. Unlike the 'big virtuosos' of the earlier 20th century (such as Horowitz), Perahia doesn't produce a big sound at the piano. I've heard him in concert, & he struggles to project in a large concert hall (unlike Radu Lupu), at least in music that requires a more sizable projection, & especially in concertos, where he has to compete with an orchestra. Rather, his playing style is more about delicate fingerings and subtle shadings, rather than a more extrovert bravura style. When Perahia needs a big sound, such as in Beethoven's Piano Concertos, he ends up pounding on the keys in order to maintain an equal dialogue with the orchestra, & especially in the outer movements.

However, Perahia's smaller sound isn't so much of an issue in the recording studio, where his piano can be more closely miked and a sense of projection isn't as necessary. Hence, he records very well. Yet, he's still got a delicate piano sound--mikes or no mikes, and therefore to my mind, Perahia tends to be at his best in music that wasn't originally composed for the heavier resonance of a modern grand piano, but instead for a fortepiano or harpsichord--such as the solo keyboard works of Mozart, Handel, Bach, Haydn, and Schubert. He can also be very good in the early romantics, too, such as Mendelssohn and Schumann, and in certain Chopin works, but less so in Liszt, Rachmaninov, and Brahms (with the possible exception of Brahm's Handel Variations).

For example, I'd consider Perahia's playing of Mendelssohn Variations Seriéuses to be exceptional: 




I've not heard Perahia's Beethoven sonata recordings--which have included a recent Hammerklavier Sonata. But I have heard him play two Beethoven Piano Concertos in concert--where, as noted, he struggled to be heard over the orchestra, as well as his Beethoven Piano Concerto cycle for Sony, with Bernard Haitink, which I didn't overly care for, at least not in comparison to other favorite cycles by Arrau/Haitink, Serkin/Kubelik, Michelangeli/Giulini, Schiff/Haitink, & Lubin/Hogwood. But it may be a different matter in the sonatas.

As for Perahia's highly regarded Mozart Piano Concerto cycle, it is very good & certainly worth owning in one's collection. Perahia's teacher at the Curtis Institute, Mieczyslaw Horszowski was one of the great Mozart players I've heard in my life, and Horszowski's approach to Mozart appears to have rubbed off on his student and deeply influenced Perahia, which is a good thing. And yet, I once compared Perahia's Mozart concertos to those by Alicia de Larrocha, another great Mozartian, and found that the latter's phrasing was more interesting and engaging, overall. Which is not to say that Perahia's Mozart phrasing isn't engaging, on the contrary, it is excellent. It's just that de Larrocha's phrasing is even better I think. I also consider Sir Colin Davis's Mozart conducting of the English Chamber Orchestra--with de Larrocha--to be superior to Perahia's Mozart conducting of the same orchestra, which isn't always a minor issue when you compare the recordings side by side. Although I'm not saying that Perahia's conducting is a hindrance or a drawback, or that it lessens the listener's enjoyment of these performances, as it doesn't--he conducts well from the keyboard. (Besides, the ECO was a great Mozart orchestra back then.) It's just that Sir Colin's Mozart conducting is even better I think. Alicia de Larrocha was also slightly better at adding ornamentation in Mozart.

However, if Perahia hadn't injured his hand shortly after embarking on his project to record a 2nd cycle of Mozart Piano Concertos for Sony--this time with the Chamber Orchestra of Europe, I suspect the new cycle might have been even better than his first cycle, judging from the one CD that was issued in the series of concertos no. 21, K. 467 & no. 27, K. 595, which is exceptional. I also suspect that the ill fated COE project might have also shown an improvement in Perahia's Mozart conducting, the second time around, judging by this one recording:










The COE CD is one of my favorite Mozart recordings by Perahia, along with his first Columbia LP box set of 6 of Mozart's 'famous' concertos, which was initially released on LP during the analogue era in the late 1970s--that is, before the young Perahia had been contracted to record the entire Mozart cycle by CBS in the 1980s. I realize that I may be contradicting what I said above, to now cite Perahia's earliest Mozart recordings as my favorites, but I find something extra special about the young Perahia's playing of these concertos in the 1970s, and especially, for example, his K. 466:

Mozart Piano Concerto No.20 in D minor, K. 466: 



.

If anyone's interested, the 6 concertos that were initially recorded for the analogue Columbia 3 LP box set were K. 466, K. 413, K. 271, K. 467, K. 449, & K. 491 (if memory serves). Although K. 246 & K. 482 were likewise among Perahia's earliest analogue recordings, and I remember liking those recordings, as well. After that, Perahia was under pressure to play, conduct & digitally record the rest of the Mozart Piano Concerto cycle for CBS, and my general impression has been that the quality of his performances never quite reached the same high peak as those earliest analogue recordings (although there are likely some exceptions).

Mozart Piano Concerto No. 24 in C minor, K. 491: 



Mozart Piano Concerto No. 11 in F major, K. 413: 



Mozart Piano Concerto No. 14 in E-flat major, K. 449: 



Mozart Piano Concerto No. 9 in E-flat major, K. 271: 




(With that said, Perahia isn't the only pianist that plays Mozart Piano Concertos exceptionally well, IMO. I also avidly listen to Rudolf Serkin's Columbia recordings, the aforementioned Alicia de Larrocha, Clara Haskil, Ivan Moravec, Alfred Brendel, Geza Anda, Maria João Pires, Ingrid Haebler, & Christian Zacharias, and on a fortepiano, Malcom Bilson & Jos van Immerseel--as these are favorite works of mine.)

In addition, I find Perahia's analogue Schumann recordings to be exceptional, too. My single favorite Schumann recording by him is his Symphonic Etudes, which would make my short list of the greatest recordings I've heard of that work (along with those by Carl Friedberg--a Clara Schumann student, Percy Grainger, Yves Nat, Nelson Freire, Claudio Arrau, & Sviatoslav Richter). The coupling of Schumann's Papillons is exceptional, too. To date, this remains one of the finest recordings that I've heard from Perahia, & I'd strongly recommend it:

--Perahia, Symphonic Etudes: 




For the sake of comparison,

--Friedberg, Symphonic Etudes (recorded late in his life): 



--Freire, Symphonic Etudes: 



--Grainger, Symphonic Etudes: 




Perahia's Fantasiestücke and Davidsbündlertänze are likewise excellent, with the latter's interpretation perhaps modeled after Clara Schumann's pupil, Fanny Davies, in that like Davies, Perahia doesn't linger much, but plays through the piece at the faster pace, relative to others. Though, incredibly, Davies somehow manages to find even more poetry in the Davidsbündlertänze than Perahia. To be fair, most pianists fall short of Clara Schumann's students in that regard, & yet I still consider Perahia to be a top Schumann player, at least by today's standards. (Even though I may ultimately prefer Harold Bauer, Yves Nat, Benno Moiseiwitsch, & Sviatoslav Richter in the Fantasiestücke, and possibly Claudio Arrau, Rudolph Firkusny, Thierry de Brunhoff, Geza Anda, Vladimir Ashkenazy, and Walter Gieseking in the Davidsbündlertänze, among my other top picks for this music.) The following discount box set contains the most recent & best remasters of Perahia's CBS Schumann:

https://www.amazon.com/Murray-Perah...nn+perahia+sony&qid=1589396912&s=music&sr=1-2

--Perahia, Fantasietücke: 



--Bauer, Fantasiestücke: 



--Richter, Fantasiestücke: 



--Moseiwitsch, Fantasiesücke: 



--& the recording that pianist Clifford Curzon once said was the most perfect rendition of anything he'd ever heard played on a piano, the 1912 "Des Abends" of Ignacy Jan Paderewski: 



.

--Perahia, Davidsbündlertänze: 



--Davies, of the same (a partial recording)--unfortunately, like other Clara Schumann students, Davies recorded late in her life, when she was well past her prime: 








Firkusny, the same: 



de Brunhoff, the same: 



Unfortunately, Arrau's great Philips recording is no longer on You Tube. Which is too bad, since Arrau considered his Davidsbündlertänze to be the one recording that he was most proud of in his career (as he told Joseph Horowitz, in the book, "Conversations with Arrau").

Perahia can be very good in Schubert, too, such as his Sony recording of Schubert's 8 Impromptus: 



. However, here he has some formidable competition from the likes of Radu Lupu, Maria Joao Pires, Alfred Brendel, Vladimir Ashkenazy, & Michel Dalberto, not to mention the older historical pianists, such as Edwin Fischer and Artur Schnabel, who were extraordinary in this music.

Lastly, to come full circle, Perahia is an exceptional Bach player. Personally, I've most liked his 6 English Suites and Goldberg Variations, which are among the best I've heard in a crowded field. Here Perahia's smaller piano sound and delicate fingerings work to his advantage, since they give the music making a greater sense of intimacy, which is wholly appropriate for the keyboard music of Bach, considering that Bach himself played this music on a clavichord at home:

Bach, 6 English Suites: 



Bach, Goldberg Variations:


----------



## mark6144 (Apr 6, 2019)

Nickmb said:


> Hm. I've looked at most of the replies and I'm beginning to wonder whether I should have joined this forum at all. There seems to be an awful lot of showing off and competition which I can't take part in as I don't have the encyclopaedic knowledge displayed by many of the participants. Just saying.


I'm glad you posted. I didn't used to rate Perahia but recently "rediscovered" him in different repertoire and really enjoy his playing. His Schumann is great - try the Davidsbündlertänze linked by Josquin13 above. I hadn't tried his Handel and Scarlatti but am listening now, so thanks for sharing that.

Yes there's a lot of showing off on this forum, but I don't mind as long as it's informative - and I learned some interesting things from this thread.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Over on another thread there is a competition about works in E minor, pitting Bach's Partita No 6 against the Brahms Cello Sonata No 1. This prompted me to pick out my Perahia recording of the partita, and compare it with my Anderszewski version (let alone the Brahms Cello piece). I think the Anderszewski recording is well regarded, but for me Perahia is simply superior.
Both players have doubtless considered their performances at length, and delivered in line with their thinking, and they know what they're doing in a way which I cannot remotely match, so I am just left with vague words for why I prefer Perahia.
The words that come to mind are poetry, elegance, style, song. I usually get the impression with Perahia that he imbues works with a poetic meaning, compared with which others can seem either just to be playing notes, sometimes showing off, or to be trying to make the meaning about them rather than about the music. Notes seem perfectly weighted to bring out the underlying poetry (and I make no apology for repeating that word).


----------



## Open Lane (Nov 11, 2015)

I own an album of Murray playing Chopin etudes. He is nuts.


----------



## Eclectic Al (Apr 23, 2020)

Open Lane said:


> I own an album of Murray playing Chopin etudes. He is nuts.


I was reading a review of a CD box set which pointed to his early Chopin recordings being wild and tempestuous, and his later Chopin being more in the established performing tradition. I don't know if the Etudes was an early recording.


----------



## Open Lane (Nov 11, 2015)

Eclectic Al said:


> I was reading a review of a CD box set which pointed to his early Chopin recordings being wild and tempestuous, and his later Chopin being more in the established performing tradition. I don't know if the Etudes was an early recording.


Not sure. Regardless, love it!


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

The Etudes are not so early, but there is an early sonatas recording, which I didn't enjoy, and an early Preludes recording, which I did enjoy.


----------



## Helgi (Dec 27, 2019)

I really like his Goldberg Variations and what I've heard of his Beethoven sonatas I've enjoyed as well.

There is a sense of humility to his playing that I like — Aldo Ciccolini is another pianist I like for the same reason.


----------



## perdido34 (Mar 11, 2015)

Open Lane said:


> I own an album of Murray playing Chopin etudes. He is nuts.


What do you mean by "nuts"? These are not at all wild interpretations. I like his Chopin etudes.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

Inspired by this thread I thought I'd listen to some early Perahia, and I chose the Kegelstatt Trio, it's very good!


----------



## perdido34 (Mar 11, 2015)

Mandryka said:


> Inspired by this thread I thought I'd listen to some early Perahia, and I chose the Kegelstatt Trio, it's very good!
> 
> View attachment 136398


Speakinbg of early Perahia, when I was a college student in Baltimore (1970-1972), Perahia gave a recital, which I remember enjoying. The Baltimore Sun's music critic, Elliot Galkin, commented in our music appreciation class that Perehia was a hell of a pianist because he made the lousy piano sound good!


----------



## mark6144 (Apr 6, 2019)

Just came across this early 80s documentary about Perahia. Some fascinating insights into what made the man, and some great footage of him working with an orchestra.


----------



## Bigbang (Jun 2, 2019)

mark6144 said:


> Just came across this early 80s documentary about Perahia. Some fascinating insights into what made the man, and some great footage of him working with an orchestra.


Yes, I plan to watch. I think I have seen parts of it.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

Bulldog said:


> For me, Perahia is okay in Bach (sure beats Barenboim). I was quite disappointed in his Handel/Scarlatti disc. Overall, I'd say that he does not do well in the baroque idiom. Even so, I would want to hear a WTC from him; don't know if he will ever record it.
> 
> I do think he fits excellently with Mozart's music as well as Schubert's.


This is pretty much where I stand in respect of Perahia. The praise for his Handel/Scarlatti recital has always surprised me as in places, especially in the Handel, the music actually runs away with him in a way which, as a long-time piano student, I'm only too familiar with, not so much actual flubs in the playing as the tempo slowly but surely speeding up too much. He made that recording not too long after coming back from his injury so I feel like a bit of a heel for raising this, but it's definitely there. I've quite liked other Bach performances of his but tend to find them a trifle featureless, a bit like Angela Hewitt's widely praised but, to me, vanilla readings. His Mozart concertos, however, I do like - his recording of no.22 in particular is the best I know.


----------



## mark6144 (Apr 6, 2019)

And here's another one for those who might share my appreciation of vintage Perahia. A documentary on the Leeds International Piano Competition he won in 1972.


----------



## Marc (Jun 15, 2007)

Bulldog said:


> For me, Perahia is okay in Bach (sure beats Barenboim). I was quite disappointed in his Handel/Scarlatti disc. Overall, I'd say that he does not do well in the baroque idiom. Even so, I would want to hear a WTC from him; don't know if he will ever record it.
> 
> I do think he fits excellently with Mozart's music as well as Schubert's.


I would like to add Beethoven, Mendelssohn and Chopin to that 'fitting' list.
As some others have mentioned, his Beethoven concerto cycle with Haitink is very enjoyable, and, personally, I rate his spread-through-the-years Beethoven sonata recordings (for EMI and DG) also very highly.


----------



## jegreenwood (Dec 25, 2015)

Marc said:


> I would like to add Beethoven, Mendelssohn and Chopin to that 'fitting' list.
> As some others have mentioned, his Beethoven concerto cycle with Haitink is very enjoyable, and, personally, I rate his spread-through-the-years Beethoven sonata recordings (*for EMI and DG*) also very highly.


*Sony and DG*? Or is there an EMI recording I'm unaware of?


----------

