Brahms' piano concertos, which are the best??
like you know my preferred version in # 1 is Peter Donohoe-Yevgeni Svetlanov with the Philharmonia Orch., but recently I had the ocassion to hear Alexis Weissenberg-Ricardo Muti version of this work with Philadelphia Orch in Emi "encore", and because of that may be that Im would be changing to that version: a diaphanous orchestral conduction, a precise and clear digitation from the soloistand and a luminous sound. Thanks to this recording was possible to me to appreciate details in the work that I hadnt hear never before!), excellent sound also. Ill would be changing to Weissenberg until now! Also comes Cesar Franks "Variations for piano and orchestra" with Karajan-Berlin, excellent too!. What do you think about this recording?? oscar.olavarria
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
Check also the Dichter/Masur recordings of both concertos, particularly on the Pentatone SACD transfers. You may approve them. At least, you may enjoy the clarity and transparency of the lines, the very realistic dynamics, the wonderful Gewandhaus Leipzig Orch. and some more.
Parla
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
I have liked the Zimerman/Bernstein/VPO recordings of both very much.
Granted, I know that people may not like his approach to the First. However it is a very introspective version that offers us new insights. I like it that Zimerman doesn't push too hard in this concerto and he comes closer to the struggles that Brahms was going through when he couldn't cope with the attempted suicide of Schumann.
The Zimerman/Bernstein/VPO Second is very fine too.
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
I would recommend Gilels/Jochum and Freire/Chailly. regards Anand
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
If asked to choose just one of each, I'd have to opt for Kovacevich/Davis in the 2nd and Curzon/Szell in the 1st. But that's an impossibly unfair task, especially with these protean works. I enjoy the Zimmerman/Bernstein 2nd a lot more than any Gramophone or Penguin Guide critics ever seemed to; similarly, that crowd always loved Gilels/Jochum more than I did. (But I'm willing to give them a listen again.)
I was slightly disappointed by the highly-praised Chailly set, as I was by the Fischer/Szell re-issues for the same reason: to my ears, the orchestra was just not recorded assertively enough. I've found the Schmidt-Isserstedt accompaniment for Brendel's analog 1st very vibrant and I still yank that off the shelves. For that matter, the recently-released Brendel/Colin Davis pairing of the 1st from the 80s is a nice souvenir of a partnership that was never a partnership, given that both had similar repertory and were under contract to Philips during the same years, the height of their recording careers.
I never understood why Decca allowed the Ashkenazy/Haitink set to go out of production, as they're enjoyable for those who insist on studio digital sound and they always seemed more lively to me than Kovacevich's set with Sawallisch.
When I was younger, I had nearly 20 recordings of #2 on LP and have close to that number on CD. It makes it that much harder to assess the more celebrated choices among performances with Pollini, Arrau, Watts, Barenboim and Richter (to name others...). Yet I rarely listen to Backhaus/Boehm because I am always troubled by the glaring, clangorous error in the downward coda section of the scherzo.
HvK rarely seemed to record either Brahms piano concerto with a high-profile pianist, nor did his recordings ever hit the big-time: but I liked the conducting of the scherzo in his DG set with Geza Anda. Anyone else like it?
Best,
Bill
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
In the first, which for all it's drama is the lesser achievement, probably Pollini/Bohm. In the second Gilels for once stands out, with Reiner as does Serkin/Szel. Ashkenazy/Haitink is well played and well recorded but the tempo drops just a little too much in places. Richter has the opposite problem in his RCA recording, the man with the whip is driving just a little bit too fast.
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
For my money, Freire/Chailly in the first concerto, Gilels/Reiner in the second. I also like very much the Horowitz/Toscanini 1948 second concerto, in spite of the sizzling-sausages surface noise (it's a live off-the-air recording).
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
What about Horowitz-Toscanini, Richter-Kondrashin and Pollini-Abbado?
The Fischer-Furtwängler performance is well below their Beethoven Fifth Piano Concerto.
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
Nobody's mentioned Leon Fleisher / George Szell? It's great!
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
I second that, the Fleischer/Szell with the Cleveland are by many considered the gold standard. They've been remastered and re-released on Sony for a budget price!
goofyfoot
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
Dear friends,
Ive changed my preferences: to day for Nr 1 my preferred is now Solomon-Kubeliks version, in "Testament", perhaps in the first place neck to neck with Arrau-Kubelik with Bavarian Orchestra in "Orfeo", a recording that is known like "Battle of Titans" because of hard dificulties between conductor and soloist about the tempos and conception of the work, in general. About Nr 2 my preferred always will be Gilels-Reiner, in RCA Living stereo. Recently ive heard also Barry Douglas-Skrowaczewski in RCA, and I think that its also a first choice for Nr 1. Best regrads. Excuse my english please! oscar.olavarria
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
Recently ive heard also Barry Douglas-Skrowaczewski in RCA, and I think that its also a first choice for Nr 1.
We heard BD playing this live at the Royal Festival Hall shortly after he won the Tchaikovsky competition and it was a huge disappointment. The sound hardly projected beyond the lid! Admittedly, many pianists and conductors seem to struggle with the balance in these concerti, where sometimes I think judicious reining in of the orchestra is needed.
Charitably, we put it down to him being over-committed post competition. His recent recordings of the solo works show what a fine Brahms player he is now. I must try the PC1 again, as you are so taken with it.
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
The Liverpool Philharmonic Hall is rather smaller (and acoustically superior) to the RFH & having heard Douglas play Brahms 1 in the former, he certainly projected his sound there & I felt somewhat bruised & battered afterwards!
Incidentally mention of Skrowaczewski reminds me that his LSO recording of No2 with Gina Bachauer (Mercury) is worth an airing.
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive
Donoho and Richter are also my picks. The 1st mvt in the Cto #1 has rare technical calibre, though the recorded sound is a far cry from typical Svetlanovs. Partly due to this, I switch to the Serkin/Ormandy for the other 2 mvts, where the 3rd mvt is more taut than all others I've heard.
- Login or register to post comments
- Flag as offensive


Solomon/Dobrowen in #2 still, 50 years after first hearing it, one of my top 3 all-time most treasured classical recordings. It's a performance that's on fire from first note to last, glorious playing by the Philharmonia with a magical solo by Haydn Rogerson in the slow movement.
#1 is a bit more problematical. I'm still looking for the recording that's in my head. Gilels/Jochum comes closest. Honourable mentions to Serkin - saw him perform it in Toronto in the 70s - and Curzon. Tempi are so important in this work. The opening must be portentous without sounding pompous or turning into a dirge and the piano entry has to, in my ideal version at least, almost contradict what has gone before.