Morning Ruby2,

I heard the interview as well and the parts of "Pictures" which I thought were superbly played.  I have his Stojokowski recordings and they are excellent, as well as a recording of Brahms 3rd piano sonata and Op.76 pieces which is excellent as well. 

Anyway, personally, I much prefer the original piano version of Pictures (I've played it, a few years ago) to any orchestration, especially the one by Ravel who alters dynamics to suit his own ends which spoils the flow of the piece (IMHO - I don't like Ravel as a rule anyway).  I'm usually in favour of orchestrations of piano music, as a rule, as well as the reverse (especially by Liszt!).  However, they mustn't take too many liberties with the original idea of the piece or the structure.

I don't think it's wrong to like a different version, it's just what you personally like, perhaps "Beauty is in the eye ear of the beholder listener? 

It's wicked and you need to undergo re-education urgently, Ruby2.


Actually, I prefer the Ravel version, too; but I have no technical musical knowledge to back this up.  It's not just because I heard the orchestrated version first, though.  A few years ago I heard the solo piano version of Le Tombeau de Couperin for the first time and immediately preferred it to the orchestrated version which I'd heard many times before.

I missed the broadcast, but I have heard (and do own) recordings of the piano original of this work, as well as several performances of Ravel's orchestrated version. Which do I prefer? Well, I certainly admire Mussorgsky's original for the keyboard, but in general, I'm more moved by Ravel's take on things. In fact, I'll go as far as to assert that it's testimony to the Frenchman's genius that he made as much from the piano original as he did - even if this meant, as Jonathan points out, altering things to suit his own ends.

What prevents me from really loving, rather than merely liking, Mussorgsky's own version is that - and this is where I run contrary to Jonathan's view - it doesn't seem to flow as seamlessly as is apparently the case in Ravel's orchestration. To be sure, I need to hear more and better piano performances before I can say that this is my final word on the matter. But the impressions I get from the best orchestral recordings never leave me in any doubt about the harmonious continuity of Ravel's reworking; whereas the slightly more disjointed piano version can rob this work of some of its charms, IMO.

FK

Ah, well, if it's welly you're after in Картинки с выставки...





Welly aplenty. Also wrong notes aplenty but I don't find them a serious musical impediment.

This was the first piece of classical music I really got into and that wasn't in the original or even in the Ravel version (or in the Ashkenazy or Henry Wood or Stokowski or Elgar Howarth versions) but in Tomita's synthesiser version. I don't really 'prefer' either the original or the Ravel - both do different things. It's clear in the piano version that there are some technical things which don't quite come off, especially the chorale textures in the Great Gate of Kiev (or Kyiv if you prefer). On the other hand it's hard for me when listening to the Ravel version not to remember how much more he gets the orchestra to do when it's his own music. Obviously Baba Yaga can 'take off' a bit more when it's an orchestra playing but on the other hand the old diabolical associations of instrumental virtuosity add something to the piano version that an orchestra can't match. In general for me there's a lot in terms of colour and texture that the piano version needs to imply because it can't actually do it, but when it's spelt out by an orchestra I don't necessarily find it more effective.

There's no doubt at all, is there, that Ravel's orchestration is an awesome piece of virtuosic writing 'for the orchestra'. The issue is simply whether in making it he in any way misrepresented Mussorgsky's original. What gets lost? The intimacy of a solo piano work, certainly - but just how intimate was it intended to be? In many ways it's a very 'public' piece. What is gained is an immeasurably expanded palate of colours and textures, and a fantastic increase in potential volume and depth - the Great Gate of Kiev on the piano always sounds to me as if it's trying to bust out of the confines the piano is imposing on it.
In contrast, the orchestral version of 'Le Tombeau de Couperin' which HtoHe mentions rather spoils (IMO) the intimacy of the piano original, made especially intimate by Ravel's subtle integrations of baroque keyboard styles and the fact that it is, after all, a homage.

I'm downloading Brendel's piano-only take on things (Phillips, 1985) as I type. I'll give it a listen and report back ...

FK

Do you know the Richter then? If that's too lethargic for you then certainly the orchestral version would be the one to stick with!

I was thinking of virtuosity in general, yes. It's certainly true that the Ravel version is 'safer' than the piano version - even an average performance can still be very effective whereas it takes an absolutely brilliant piano performance to pull it off really well.

martle, I think what gets lost whenever something gets orchestrated is ambiguity, no? One could make a case that even though the Great Gate is musically pretty monumental it's still (as are all the pieces!) Mussorgsky's own reflections on an artwork by a friend (the gate never existed...) - so in the piano version you still have that ambiguity that a full orchestra doesn't allow for. At least that's my take on it.

Mussorgsky's words on Hartmann's death are pretty strong.

"This is how the wise usually console us blockheads, in such cases; 'He is no more, but what he has done lives and will live'…Away with such wisdom! When 'he' has not lived in vain, but has created - one must be a rascal to revel in the comforting thought that 'he' can create no more. No, one cannot and must not be comforted, there can be and must be no consolation - it is a rotten morality!"

I can't find online my favourite part of the quote. Something like "with a dash of onion to bring out the tears"...