Piano Sonata No.3 In B Minor, Op.58: I. Allegro maetoso
Piano Sonata No.3 In B Minor, Op.58: II. Scherzo: Molto vivace
Piano Sonata No.3 In B Minor, Op.58: III. Largo
Piano Sonata No.3 In B Minor, Op.58: IV. Finale: Presto, non tanto
Mazurka No.36 In A Minor, Op.59 No.1
Mazurka No.37 In A-flat, Op.59 No.2
Mazurka No.38 In F-sharp Minor, Op.59 No.3
Nocturne No.4 In F, Op.15 No.1
Scherzo No.3 In C-sharp Minor, Op.39
Polonaise No.6 In A-flat, Op.53
Record-label politics prevented this awesome recording of Argentinean pianist Martha Argerich from being released for 34 years. The spitfire musician delivers a powerful set of Chopin's best-loved works that still sounds r... more »iveting today. Intense and gorgeous. --Jason Verlinde« less
Record-label politics prevented this awesome recording of Argentinean pianist Martha Argerich from being released for 34 years. The spitfire musician delivers a powerful set of Chopin's best-loved works that still sounds riveting today. Intense and gorgeous. --Jason Verlinde
"Every word praise of Argerich's playing on this website is certainly heartfelt and true. Of the pianist's genius there is no disputing. But whether she is doing justice to Chopin is perhaps another matter.I am reminded of some tenors in opera who approach every bar of music with whitehot intensity, even where the situation (and the composer's markings) call for gentleness. In a more recent recording, Argerich keeps the conductor hard pressed to follow her tempi, making the work her show entirely and not a concerto in the strict sense of the word.So here on this EMI recording we have the music brilliantly played--and this is one CD I plan to keep in my collection--but (and I ask this hestitatingly and humbly) is this Chopin being played by Argerich or Argerich playing Chopin? Thomas May's comments above go quite some way in answering this question; but we are not dealing with concrete, only abstract, nouns here.Another analogy might be all those Ella Fitzgerald sets of Gershwin, Kern, et alia. Certainly here we have these composers deconstructed and recreated to fit the singer's brand of performance. Well, Gershwin survives, Kern does not, Berlin does, and so on. So again I have to wonder if these highly idiosyncratic playings are true to the composer (whatever that might mean).On the other hand, great music exists objectively only as notes on lines on paper. Perhaps Chopin never had this kind of playing mind but certainly would accept it. That must remain forever a moot point. Still 5 stars to CD."
Rivets the soul!
Michael Newberry | Santa Monica | 03/27/2000
(5 out of 5 stars)
"I have never been quite happy with pianists; it seems I should love much of the piano repertoire from Bach through Ravel and Rachmaninov. I have some things from Horowitz, Rubinstein, Ax, and Van Cliburn, but they don't give me feeling the excitement the music seems to promise. Last year I got this Argerich recording (thanks to Amazon's audio abilities). Now this is a great pianist...what a sound, what passion, how lyric, dynamic...and there is movement, tension that drives the music-something similar to Toscanini. Emotionally the playing is smoldering; at times blazing, and at other times so delicate and meaningful you could cry. And it all seems so natural, so right. I have gone on to buy many of her other recordings-and they all bring me tremendous satisfaction. In fact Argerich has inspired me to go and listen to other pianists with a renewed interest to hear their interpretations. But for me she plays on a level above the rest."
A restored jewel in the Argerich catalog
Santa Fe Listener | Santa Fe, NM USA | 09/03/2006
(5 out of 5 stars)
"If I had to pick a single CD to win awed admiration for Martha Argerich, this Chopin recital would be it. Only 24 when she made these long-suppressed recordings, Argerich's musicality and dazzling technqiue defy belief. Every ounce of praise for her Third Sonata is deserved--it's spontaneous, flexible, intense, by turns tender and declamatory. The most blessed quality is that she doesn't bang or harangue us--not always the case in later years. Her sense of urgency doesn't become eckless; the bursts of excitment aren't oerly explosive.
My only caveat would be for audiophiles. Although an Abbey Road studio recording, you get the feeling somewhat that Argerich is performing in a boomy hall. Also, in the loudest fortes there's mircophone shatter. For many listeners these drawbacks won't matter a whit, not in the face of an undisputed keyboard genius.
"
Exceptional Work!
Santa Fe Listener | 02/21/2000
(5 out of 5 stars)
"As an onwer of far too many CD's, this ranks number 2 on my list. The piano in this is absolutely amazing. This is a CD you will want on when you are sleeping, eating and any other time your ears can listen. It is simply transporting. The only CD I've heard better than this is John McArthur's, Hidden album. This Chopin is a must for any fan of his work!"
Excellent recording. Legendary? Not really
Xiao He | Chino Hills, CA | 03/30/2003
(4 out of 5 stars)
"Having been touted (branded) as legendary, this recording has drawn many classical listeners' attention. I admit that her technical superiority is intensively shown in this recording. It's clear that she plays the music with passion. But is this particular recording good enough to be glorified to this extent? Not really. I do appreciate this particular CD because it accounts for the musicality of early Martha Argerich. But I think that, in this CD, Argerich plays without much consideration. I am a fan of Argerich, and I appreciate her thundering power most of the time. But I think playing chopin needs a sense of manipulation, which allows a performer to empathize with the music and the composer. It seems that, if taking out the melody, what left, the only thing left, is her strength. I believe that her recordings under the label of DG are much better. For example, in her 1961 debute recording, the "Scherzo No.3 In C-sharp Minor, Op.39" is played with much more consideration because what she puts in the music is not only strength but also her understanding of the music. Also, I think that EMI's recording technic is not good. I can't believe my ears that the 1961 recording with DG has a much higher audio quality than this 1965 recording."