To many readers of Gramophone, Keith Jarrett will no doubt be
pre-eminently a ''jazz pianist''. That label, combined with knowledge of
his outspokenness and engaging lack of false modesty (see for instance
the Gramophone interview, 9/91), might lead one to expect his
Shostakovich to be wayward or controversial. In fact there's very little
that's startling about this recording, apart perhaps from the
meticulous clarity of the playing (the beautifully focused ECM recording
helps of course). I can't remember another performance of the
tumultuous D flat major Fugue in which the details have stood out so
finely or the voices maintained their identity with such compelling
consistency.
There are a few surprises though; not least the overall timing. Jarrett's cycle takes about half an hour less than the dedicatee Tatyana Nikolaieva's Gramophone Award-winning set on Hyperion. Roger Woodward's long deleted RCA set (12/75) took about the same time, but that sounded hurried; this doesn't. It's another good example of the huge difference that can exist between psychological and clock time. In fact in one case—the C major Fugue—Jarrett's basic pulse is almost exactly half that of Nikolaieva; and there's a good reason—he's the only professional pianist I've ever heard who takes the metronome marking given in the complete Shostakovich Edition (crotchet=92) at face value. Full marks for research; for me though the music crawls at this speed, and with long notes held for double their length it's harder to follow the part-writing. Jarrett's only other significant departure from current normal practice is his substitution of a grinding right-hand f—d flat'—f' for Shostakovich's d—b flat—d' in bar 23 (track 3: 0'42'') of the G major Prelude: surely a misreading.
As those timings suggest, Jarrett on the whole is inclined to take things faster than Nikolaieva. In one or two places I prefer his tempos: Nikolaieva's slow three-in-a-bar in the superb G sharp minor passacaglia-prelude sounds effortful (in the first big crescendo at least) after Jarrett; but comparing them in the later stages of this grandly symphonic piece it's Nikolaieva who seems to me to have got nearer to the dark heart of this music. That's certainly the case in the following Fugue, where Jarrett has the poise, the brilliance and the strong sense of shape one would expect, but in the Nikolaieva there's another, more obviously human dimension: pained intensity, fear, final resignation—inadequate terms, but perhaps giving some idea of what she, uniquely, provides. The Rosslyn Hill Chapel acoustic may be cloudier, the playing may not be utterly blemish-free, but the vision and expressive penetration are beyond comparison.
I don't want to give the impression that Nikolaieva wins unequivocally in every single prelude or fugue. Jarrett's liquid cantabile in the Chopinesque F sharp major Prelude persuades me more readily than the relatively pedestrian Nikolaieva, and his handling of the subsequent Fugue was a real revelation to me—serenity, in Shostakovich! I also enjoyed his darting G major Fugue very much, and still more the rippling, glittering elegance of his B flat major Prelude. Take any one of his performances at random there'll almost certainly be something to catch and challenge the ear. What I do miss though is not just Nikolaieva's wider and deeper expressive range, but the remarkable cumulative effect she brings to the cycle as a whole—the impression of a great musical journey with the final D minor Fugue as its crowning moment. The more one follows Jarrett through the score, the less involving his playing seems to become. An interesting set, certainly, but not, for me, a deeply rewarding one.' (Stephen Johnson / Gramophone)
There are a few surprises though; not least the overall timing. Jarrett's cycle takes about half an hour less than the dedicatee Tatyana Nikolaieva's Gramophone Award-winning set on Hyperion. Roger Woodward's long deleted RCA set (12/75) took about the same time, but that sounded hurried; this doesn't. It's another good example of the huge difference that can exist between psychological and clock time. In fact in one case—the C major Fugue—Jarrett's basic pulse is almost exactly half that of Nikolaieva; and there's a good reason—he's the only professional pianist I've ever heard who takes the metronome marking given in the complete Shostakovich Edition (crotchet=92) at face value. Full marks for research; for me though the music crawls at this speed, and with long notes held for double their length it's harder to follow the part-writing. Jarrett's only other significant departure from current normal practice is his substitution of a grinding right-hand f—d flat'—f' for Shostakovich's d—b flat—d' in bar 23 (track 3: 0'42'') of the G major Prelude: surely a misreading.
As those timings suggest, Jarrett on the whole is inclined to take things faster than Nikolaieva. In one or two places I prefer his tempos: Nikolaieva's slow three-in-a-bar in the superb G sharp minor passacaglia-prelude sounds effortful (in the first big crescendo at least) after Jarrett; but comparing them in the later stages of this grandly symphonic piece it's Nikolaieva who seems to me to have got nearer to the dark heart of this music. That's certainly the case in the following Fugue, where Jarrett has the poise, the brilliance and the strong sense of shape one would expect, but in the Nikolaieva there's another, more obviously human dimension: pained intensity, fear, final resignation—inadequate terms, but perhaps giving some idea of what she, uniquely, provides. The Rosslyn Hill Chapel acoustic may be cloudier, the playing may not be utterly blemish-free, but the vision and expressive penetration are beyond comparison.
I don't want to give the impression that Nikolaieva wins unequivocally in every single prelude or fugue. Jarrett's liquid cantabile in the Chopinesque F sharp major Prelude persuades me more readily than the relatively pedestrian Nikolaieva, and his handling of the subsequent Fugue was a real revelation to me—serenity, in Shostakovich! I also enjoyed his darting G major Fugue very much, and still more the rippling, glittering elegance of his B flat major Prelude. Take any one of his performances at random there'll almost certainly be something to catch and challenge the ear. What I do miss though is not just Nikolaieva's wider and deeper expressive range, but the remarkable cumulative effect she brings to the cycle as a whole—the impression of a great musical journey with the final D minor Fugue as its crowning moment. The more one follows Jarrett through the score, the less involving his playing seems to become. An interesting set, certainly, but not, for me, a deeply rewarding one.' (Stephen Johnson / Gramophone)
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario