# Beethoven Piano Sonata no. 23 "Appassionata"



## pianoville

Where do I even begin with this work? One of Beethoven's greatest masterpieces, and perhaps one of the greatest pieces of the piano litterature. From the dark first theme and the fate motif to the exciting coda this sonata has so much to offer!

What do you think of this work? Why do you like/dislike it?

And what are your favorite recordings of this sonata, and what do you like about them? For me Gilels is the best, because of the great contrasts he does between the different sections, without overexaggerating it. He also has a very beautiful tone.


----------



## Mandryka

One reason I often dislike this sonata is that, in my experience, pianists use it as a vehicle to display their virtuosity, which doesn’t interest me. Another reason I dislike it is that it is sometimes played aggressively, as if the principal emotion in the first movement is anger, and that doesn’t interest me either. 

There’s a performance by Claudio Arrau which is worth hearing. He finds tragedy in the music and I find it moving to hear. It’s on a Classic Archives DVD.


----------



## KenOC

I first heard the Appassionata on an MK mono LP with Richter. It brought the house down (not literally, of course, but close to it). BAD inner-groove distortion and the usual lousy sonics of Soviet recordings of that period. Still...










I've read that the Brits habitually refer to this sonata as the "Pashunarter."


----------



## Mandryka

KenOC said:


> I first heard the Appassionata on an MK mono LP with Richter. It brought the house down (not literally, of course, but close to it). BAD inner-groove distortion and the usual lousy sonics of Soviet recordings of that period. Still...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've read that the Brits habitually refer to this sonata as the "Pashunarter."


This is the inferior one you like, it's an example of the sort of muscular piano playing up with which I will not put, straight out of Vulgaria.






And I think the superior one I like is somewhere on this, I haven't checked






You just have to look at the faces of the pianists to see the difference. Richter has all the hard ruthlessness of Putin; Arrau has the wisdom of age written all over his mug.


----------



## joen_cph

My favourites are

- Gilels in Brilliant Classics 6CD set with Gilels/Beethoven, January 1961
- Richter Carnegie Hall 1960. There are other interesting live recordings by him too, as already mentioned.

Obviously more extrovert than recommended in post #2.


----------



## pianoville

Mandryka said:


> One reason I often dislike this sonata is that, in my experience, pianists use it as a vehicle to display their virtuosity, which doesn't interest me. Another reason I dislike it is that it is sometimes played aggressively, as if the principal emotion in the first movement is anger, and that doesn't interest me either.
> 
> There's a performance by Claudio Arrau which is worth hearing. He finds tragedy in the music and I find it moving to hear. It's on a Classic Archives DVD.


I very much agree with you. Very many pianists use this as a kind of showpiece. Especially all the young prodigies of today that unfortunately often do not understand the music.


----------



## Josquin13

The worst performances are the ones where the pianist bludgeons the piano keys & presses down on the sustain pedal at the same time (like Evgeny Kissin, whose overly generalized Beethoven becomes more about slamming piano keys than musical content). I agree that Emil Gilels and Claudio Arrau turn the Appassionata into music--a kind of imaginative & more even tempered fantasia for solo piano--more so than most other pianists.

Arrau's boyhood training with Liszt's favorite last pupil Martin Krause informs the quality of his performance. Central to Krause's teaching, according to Arrau's reminiscences (in the book "Conversations with Arrau"), was that the pianist should never appear to expend all of their technical reserves in performance. Krause taught Arrau that he should give the audience the impression that he always had more technical reserves than he was using, which he could draw upon, if need be. This allows for a smoother, more even toned & less overheated Appassionata than we normally hear from pianists not trained in the Liszt tradition. Indeed, the moments where Arrau strikes the keys forcefully in his Appassionata are kept to a bare minimum--he does so only when necessary, and even then he maintains more reserve than Sviatoslav Richter does. It allows the music to have more dimensions.

Does Krause's teaching come down from Beethoven (& perhaps Mozart) to Czerny and Liszt? I believe very strongly that it does. It unquestionably comes from Liszt, judging from the remembrances of his students. For example, Krause once said that Arrau would be his "masterpiece", but he also said of another Liszt pupil, Emil von Sauer, that von Sauer was "the legitimate heir of Liszt; he has more of his charm and geniality than any other Liszt pupil." Indeed von Sauer was said "to caress the piano in a suave, polished manner. His recordings show him to have been a smooth pianist who inclined toward relaxed tempos and exactitude of detail over temperament" (Harold Schonberg, "Great Pianists", P. 317) Of course, these comments would suffice as a description of Arrau's playing as well. Which helps to explain why Arrau doesn't play the music of Beethoven or Liszt in an overly loud, fast, showy display of outsized virtuosity (for the sake of virtuosity). These attributes set Arrau's performances of Beethoven and Liszt apart from many other pianists, especially those that have been misguided by the (overly renowned) examples of what von Sauer criticized as the "too fast & too loud" big virtuosos of the 1930s. Perhaps this negative influence is nowhere more apparent than in performances of Beethoven's Appassionata and Liszt's Sonata in B minor (& other similar works that lend themselves to loud virtuosic displays).

In this regard, Arrau and Gilels' more even, smooth toned performances of the Appassionata have much in common. Gilels' boyhood training similarly connects back to Liszt (& it shows), via the studies of his first teacher (before Neuhaus) with Theodor Leschitizsky, who studied with Czerny.

Alfred Brendel (on Philips in 1971) also doesn't slam the piano keys in the Appassionata, nor in the music of Liszt, either--being another pianist whose lineage can be traced back to Krause, via his teacher Edwin Fischer. However, Brendel's interpretation is quite different from Arrau & Gilels'. I find it faster and more Mozartian right from the opening. It's good to hear Brendel's alternative view, but I don't think he's quite as successful as Gilels or Arrau in this work.

It would have also been very interesting to hear Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli play Beethoven's Appassionata, as he had similar attributes in Beethoven to Arrau and Gilels. Although Michelangeli's training can't be traced back to Czerny or Liszt, as far as I know. Even so, Alfred Cortot once declared of the young Michelangeli, "Here is a new Liszt". & IMO, any Beethoven piano sonata played by Michelangeli is worth hearing, especially the early ones.

Another notable Appassionata that should be mentioned, especially in light of Krause's teaching, is that of Edwin Fischer's. Fischer too (appropriately) plays the work as a more even tempered, imaginative fantasia:


----------



## joen_cph

There´s a huge difference between early Arrau and the later, more subdued one. An obvious example is his versions of the Weber Konzertstück, from the Defauw version (1945) to Galliera (1960). There are further versions too http://arrauhouse.org/content/disc_weber.htm

The Arrau discography lists several Appassionatas, from 1954 until 1985 http://arrauhouse.org/content/disc_beethoven_solo2.htm

Likewise, Gilels´versions vary a lot. The Brilliant Classics is very different from and faster than say his late DG one.

BTW Peter Gutmann in "Classical Notes" has an interesting (as always) article about the work & some recordings.


----------



## Josquin13

Is there an early version of the Appassionata from Arrau? I don't know one. I agree that technically he was more nimble in the 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s than by the 1980s. However, Arrau's interpretations were always on the slow side, for the most part, and consequently, more detailed. Although he may have slowed down even more by the 1980s.

Unlike Richter, I've never heard Gilels get out of control, or lose his even tone, or overly pound the piano keys. But I haven't heard the Brilliant Appassionata that you speak of. Was it recorded from a live concert?


----------



## Mandryka

Richter released a recording for Philips in the 1980s, does anyone know the date. I think I like it more than the one he released in the 1960s. An early Arrau one was released in a set called A Liszt Legacy a few years ago.

Badura Skoda on Astree is fast but the piano is so good - clear, colourful -- that it becomes interesting -- further proof that people who play modern pianos should keep their mitts off unless they're called Arrau and are over 70.


----------



## joen_cph

I haven´t heard the earlier Arraus, they are probably not from his most contrasting period. I personally tend to prefer the earlier Arrau, so I don't dig much into the later recordings, though I find say the Chopin Nocturnes/philips very interesting.

I agree that Gilels 1961 is more controlled than Richter in 1960. Yet the 1961 is also much more extrovert, and I think tension-loaded, than the DG. Reviewers tend too agree.


----------



## Blancrocher

Mandryka said:


> Richter released a recording for Philips in the 1980s, does anyone know the date. I think I like it much more than the one he released in the 1960s.


That Philips recording--a very late, great one--is from 1992.


----------



## Josquin13

There are many Richter Appassionata performances, starting in Kiev and Prague in 1959, then at the Moscow Conservatory in 1960 (which I prefer to his NYC recording), then various performances in the New York City area, including the one from Carnegie Hall in 1960. To my knowledge, however, Richter didn't record the sonata again until 1992--when he recorded it three times in concert, & it's the October 25, 1992 Appassionata performance from the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam that appeared on Philips and Decca Japan. The other two 1992 performances were from the Villa Medici in Briosco (on St-Laurent Studio YSL SR 1992 09 20) and the Fritz Phillips Music Hall in Eindhoven (on VPRO EW 9301).

EDIT--I see Blancrocher beat me to it. Oh well...


----------



## Josquin13

joen_cph writes, "I agree that Gilels 1961 is more controlled than Richter in 1960. Yet the 1961 is also much more extrovert, and I think tension-loaded, than the DG. Reviewers tend too agree."

That makes sense to me. Gilels' Beethoven is almost always more vitally interesting in concert than in the studio for DG (with the exception of his Waldstein, and a few other sonatas). I'll try to hear it. Thanks. (Gilels is a favorite pianist of mine, especially in Beethoven.)

I agree about Arrau's Chopin 21 Nocturnes--although they've been criticized for being too slow and ponderous. I don't think so. Although it could be true for the rest of Arrau's Chopin (except for the early EMI Etudes). But that's a different school of pianism, in my view.


----------



## Mandryka

Here






It's as colourful as woodblocks! I wasn't entirely joking when I said mitts off!


----------



## Larkenfield

I cannot take Beethoven played on rattletrap instruments and, quite fortunately, Arrau's Philips recording isn't one of them. Imagine Beethoven suddenly getting his hearing back and he has to hear one of his sonatas played on a relic that couldn't have possibly sounded that bad in his day.


----------



## EdwardBast

Mandryka said:


> One reason I often dislike this sonata is that, in my experience, pianists use it as a vehicle to display their virtuosity, which doesn't interest me. *Another reason I dislike it is that it is sometimes played aggressively, as if the principal emotion in the first movement is anger,* and that doesn't interest me either.
> 
> There's a performance by Claudio Arrau which is worth hearing. He finds tragedy in the music and I find it moving to hear. It's on a Classic Archives DVD.


Are you sure the pianists who play it aggressively are going for anger and not, for example, existential terror or borderline madness? If a performance of the first movement doesn't sound unhinged, it isn't intense enough for me. I like Ashkenazy for this one.


----------



## KenOC

EdwardBast said:


> Are sure the pianists who play it aggressively are going for anger and not, for example, existential terror or borderline madness? If a performance of the first movement doesn't sound unhinged, it isn't intense enough for me. I like Ashkenazy for this one.


I kind of agree with this. Another view is from Gould who called Beethoven "belligerent" here.


----------



## Josquin13

I've now listened to the 1961 live Gilels' Appassionata. Wow. You're right, he plays with a lot more power and speed--it's nearly 5 minutes faster than his later DG version! I agree, it doesn't accord with my argument, as it's very different from Arrau's approach, & Gilels' own later DG recording. I find his interpretation to be surprisingly youthful and brash (for Gilels), and he does pound the piano keys a good deal (something that I am unaccustomed to hearing from him). No, I don't find it as interesting as Arrau's playing in Lark's clip above, which I'm listening to at the moment.


----------



## Josquin13

EdwardBast writes, "Are sure the pianists who play it aggressively are going for anger and not, for example, existential terror or borderline madness? If a performance of the first movement doesn't sound unhinged, it isn't intense enough for me. I like Ashkenazy for this one."

I'm listening to Ashkenazy right now. Wow, this is brilliant playing. I like his interpretation a lot. It's super energized & intense, but he never pounds over emphatically on the keys, or gets out of control. Rather his control is immaculate, stunningly so. You might not agree with me, but I think this interpretation fits very well within my improvisational "fantasia" argument, for the most part--despite that, yes, Ashkenazy does show a stronger temperament than Arrau. The music may become imaginatively "unhinged", but I don't find Ashkenazy's playing unhinged, or ever too loud or overdone--he stays very smoothly in control. Thanks for bringing this recording to my attention. (Ashkenazy's Beethoven sonatas were the first Beethoven LPs I ever bought, but it's been too many years since I've heard them, since I never replaced them on CD. That'll change now...)


----------



## EdwardBast

Josquin13 said:


> EdwardBast writes, "Are sure the pianists who play it aggressively are going for anger and not, for example, existential terror or borderline madness? If a performance of the first movement doesn't sound unhinged, it isn't intense enough for me. I like Ashkenazy for this one."
> 
> I'm listening to Ashkenazy right now. Wow, this is brilliant playing. I like his interpretation a lot. It's super energized & intense, but he never pounds over emphatically on the keys, or gets out of control. Rather his control is immaculate, stunningly so. You might not agree with me, but I think this interpretation fits very well within my improvisational "fantasia" argument, for the most part--despite that, yes, Ashkenazy does show a stronger temperament than Arrau. *The music may become imaginatively "unhinged", but I don't find Ashkenazy's playing unhinged, or ever too loud or overdone--he stays very smoothly in control.* Thanks for bringing this recording to my attention. (Ashkenazy's Beethoven sonatas were the first Beethoven LPs I ever bought, but it's been too many years since I've heard them, since I never replaced them on CD. That'll change now...)


Yes. When I wrote unhinged, I didn't mean with respect to execution, and certainly not on the part of the pianist. I meant that the character portrayed, the _persona_ of the work (the fictional being whose expressive experience the music is) sounds unhinged, tormented and driven to distraction in the opening theme and completely overcome and crushed in the retransition and coda. The phenomenal precision of the playing, by taking any sense of mundane human limitation out of the experience, causes the player to disappear for me and to fully inhabit the character within the music. It's like an actor controlling every aspect of a character's expression, gesture and physiognomy, and by so doing vanishing from the real world and becoming the character.


----------



## Guest

Kodoma doesn't destroy the piano, either:


----------



## Dimace

Mandryka said:


> And I think the superior one I like is somewhere on this, I haven't checked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just have to look at the faces of the pianists to see the difference. Richter has all the hard ruthlessness of Putin; Arrau has the wisdom of age written all over his mug.


This remoted evening wasn't Arrau who was sitting in front of the Klavier, but Beethoven himself. You just posted the best Appassionata (and not only...) in human history. For a live performance, the unreachable standard for every pianist.


----------



## joen_cph

For those interested, the 23rd Sonata starts at 40:06. 

It´s definitely among the more temperamental performances of Arrau's middle/later years.


----------



## Mandryka

joen_cph said:


> For those interested, the 23rd Sonata starts at 40:06.
> 
> It´s definitely among the more temperamental performances of Arrau's middle/later years.


I'd be interested to collect a list of incandescent Arrau performances like this. My suspicion is that they're all live. Apart from this Appassionata, I remember liking

The Chopin preludes and Schumann Etudes from Prague
The Chopin op 62/1 on Ermitage, and the Beethoven op 27/1 from the same concert
The op 111 on a VAI DVD


----------



## Holden4th

My imprint recording of Op 57 was the Kempff mono and I was only 13 at the time. When I came to play it myself, what I heard from Kempff didn't work for me. Various other recordings left me with the impression that this was a good sonata with plenty of pathos but the work didn't seem to go anywhere special.

After many years a revelation - I got Richter's 1960 recording on a Melodiya CD and I was transfixed. This was just awesome playing and it made so much sense. It spoke to me as a pianist. It was passionate! Nothing could beat this interpretation. Wrong! 

Someone sent me the Gilels live Moscow from January 1961 and I was just gobsmacked. It has forward drive yet it ebbs and flows. Gilels seems on the edge of losing control but he never does and it's this that makes this performance so exciting. This is my favourite Appassionata and when I compare it to what's in the almost complete studio recording he made of the LvB sonatas it's like listening to two different pianists. Even if you prefer a more sedate approach, it's worth a listen.


----------



## SearsPoncho

Pollini. Pollini. Pollini. I have many recordings of this work and this is easily my favorite

If you want to hear a slow, epic, Klemperer-esque performance, Gilels. Arrau is another if you like that approach.

Oooops! This is supposed to be for the Hammerklavier. I put it in the wrong thread. I don't see a "delete post" button/icon. Anyhow, you can ignore or delete this. Is there a delete button?


----------



## DavidA

No question in my mind that Richter is the one to go for. Live at Carnegie in 1966 even more than hiS studio if you can ignore the occasional smudge.


----------



## Mandryka

The only one that has caught my interest is Arrau on live Classic Archives. There may be one other, the Studio Cziffra.







.


----------



## Ned Low

It is Wagner's favourite piano sonata by Beethoven


----------

