Forgettable Chopin - Vladimir Ashkenazy Plays Waltzes & Nocturnes

The Good: One or two decent bits of music, Duration
The Bad: Poor mix, Lack of emotional resonance, Narcoleptic Nocturnes
The Basics: Frederic Chopin's Waltzes & Nocturnes are played universally slow and sad by pianist Vladimir Ashkenazy, evoking little emotional reaction and summoning sleep, even from the well-rested!


I hate writing reviews of classical c.d.s. I hate doing this not because I don't love classical music, but rather because I am a layperson, not a professional classical music expert or connoisseur. Which means, my reviews tend to do their best to describe the music and then declare whether or not I actually enjoyed the music. But as far as a universal standard of quality, I'm not it. One of my favorite Mussorgsky albums (reviewed here!) gets a lot of play around my house and in the car, but when my mother heard it a few weeks ago, she just crewed up her face and said "This is terrible!" I said, "I like Mussorgsky," to which she responded, "So do I, but this recording is doing nothing for me!"

With that in mind, Waltzes & Nocturnes is by no means the first Chopin work I have reviewed. Once upon a time, I timidly reviewed a collection of Nocturnes (reviewed here!) and I found I did not enjoy them. Because I have heard a great deal about how Chopin's Nocturnes are important and some of his best works, I've been eager to find some that I enjoy.

This album was not it. With seventeen tracks (ten waltzes, seven nocturnes) clocking in at almost sixty-eight minutes, pianist Vladimir Ashkenazy presents a bunch of songs that ultimately have a narcoleptic effect and feel to them. This is music to put oneself asleep to.

One of the reasons I - and I suspect many others - cringe away from Classical music reviews is because there are no lyrics. In the case of Waltzes & Nocturnes, the music is solely one man at one piano and without words to critique in combination with music, the big questions are; what does it sound like and what effect did it have on you? Both of these are highly subjective and not terribly useful. Striving for that "very helpful" is hard with so little to work with.

I write "so little to work with" because composer Frederic Chopin (1810 - 1849) gives the listener so little to work with. Musically, there are things that may be mentioned ("Waltz E minor, op. posth." includes a number of going up and down the higher ranges of the scale and sounds is composed of fast movements, so it seems like it must be hard to play), but for the subjective experience of what it means, the composer is of no help whatsoever. The titles to the pieces describe them to the classical music aficionados, not to the common person. With titles like "[Nocturne] E flat major, op. 9 no. 2" and "[Waltz] A minor, op.34 no.2" the listener is left with no reference point and it's both annoying and snobbish. It's the auditory equivalent to a painting entitled "Oil Painting, White Canvas, 96% Yellow Ocre, 4% Cadmium Yellow." Yes, it tells us what it is, but it does not tell us what it IS. It's enough to make me wish I were a time traveler, working at a cafe and when Chopin walked in I offered him "83% H2O, 7% Citric Acid, 10% Vitamins C, D, E and B12." Should he look at me funny, I would be able to declare, "Now you know what it feels like, you pompous ass!"

I write this not because I lack the imagination to feel what these piano numbers might make me feel or because I am somehow deficient in the research skills to find out what all these chords and numbers mean, but because the titles do not say anything! Even if I knew all of the code, it would still be a list of the composition. When I was in college, there was a research paper I wrote on Anton Chekov's The Ant that I remember to this day. I spent time and effort researching the comparisons in Chekov's story to a fable and I churned out the required five pages with the (admittedly lame) thesis "Chekov's The Ant Is a Metaphorical Recreation of The Ant" (I think it was probably Aesop). I was heartbroken when I received the paper back with a C- and the t.a. who graded it, when I tried to contest that my analysis was flawless, simply said, "Chekov gives you that with the title. What does it MEAN?" Chopin's names are the same by analogy. Fine, he's created a Waltz that uses the chords in B minor with op.69 (and I'm assuming the no. 2 means it's the second one he's done in this specific combination) (track 6), what does that mean?

Which leaves the listener to define completely what it means to them. Part of the reason I belabor this point so much is that the music did not mean all that much to me. My favorite classical album thus far, Chopin's Greatest Hits (reviewed here!) inspired any number of images and thoughts to pop into my mind. After ten listens to this disc, only two tracks were distinctive enough to stand out.

Track ten, the "Waltz E minor, op. posth." is a fast-moving piece that - while it is never loud - soars up and down the scales, evoking a sense of ascent and descent that is free of labor, effortless, but still somehow important. The other track, "Nocturne C sharp minor, op. 27 no. 2" (track 13) has some of the same elements. There is a strong sense of movement and Vladimir Ashkenazy keeps the pace fast and the sound as rich as it can be considering he is one man at a piano and all of the music is in the upper registers.

Lacking in these pieces are range that I've heard in other works by Chopin. Indeed, these pieces are relegated to the higher keys of the piano and while the two tracks listed above have some speed to them, most do not. In fact, most are quiet, ponderous and inspiring less of the imagination than sleep. Usually when I think of waltzes, I think somewhat faster classical pieces, though several of Chopin's waltzes - at least as performed by Ashkenazy on the first half of this disc are remarkably slow.

I would not recommend this disc for a quiet dinner or romantic evening, it is hardly mood music as it does not engage the listener and inspire imaginations of anything. Instead, it recommends itself well to sleep. Insomniac? Try this!

For those who understand the codes, here is a track listing, though from an objective standpoint, most of these tracks sound alike: they are slow and high. Ashkenazy plays:
(Waltzes) E flat major 'Grande valse brillante,' op. 18
A minor, op.34 no.2
F major, op.34 no.3
A flat major, op42
A flat major, op.69 no.1 [These prior three tracks blend together for one nine minute bit of auditory goo]
B minor, op.69 no.2
G flat major, op.70 no.1
F minor, op.70 no.2
D flat major, op.70 no.3
E minor, op. posth.
(Nocturnes) E flat major, op.9 no.2
F sharp major, op.15 no.2
C sharp minor, op.27 no.1
D flat major, op. 27 no.2
B major, op.32 no.1
A flat major, op.32 no.2
G major, op.37 no.2

While I anticipated, from earlier experiences with Chopin nocturnes, the nocturnes to be slow and sleepy, I did not anticipate the waltzes being that way. Ashkenazy plays the entire album with a largely sleepy, slow and draining affect to the music. While he might well be playing fine, the music is a terrible mix, homogenous and sleepy (not depressing but evoking sleep from the listener). My only note here is that I've slept very well the previous nights, so there's no earthly reason I should fall asleep to this disc, save that that is the reaction it evokes.

The best track is "Waltz E minor, op. posth." I was not fond of the very tiresome (and tiring) "Nocturne D flat major, op.27 no.2."

For other Classical music reviews, please check out my takes on:
Pini Di Roma - Respighi, Eugene Ormandy
The Masterpieces Collection: Grieg Volume 4
Metamorphoseon - Ottorino Respighi

4/10

For other music reviews, please visit my Music Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2013, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

From that Restaurant Last Night . . .Chopin Nocturnes Volume 1 Drifts Away.

The Good: Relaxing, Some pieces have clearly difficult fingerings
The Bad: Nothing Memorable, Nothing striking, Nothing terribly evocative
The Basics: Nothing terrible or terrific, simply unmemorable and unevocative, which I require to recommend a classical piece.


For those who haven't read many of my reviews, I've been getting into classical music more and more lately and I find I'm enjoying that quite a bit. There have been one or two classical albums I've reviewed that haven't grabbed me, but for the most part, the experience has been enlightening; I've been learning much about the origins of music and appreciating music as a whole more. To me, great classical music evokes images, inspires the imagination and - in short - stirs something up inside you.

Thus, Chopin's first disappointment to me are his nocturnes. This collection has twelve Chopin nocturnes and I went into it blind. I've loved Chopin's polonaises and marches, his nocturnes were largely unknown to me. Out of twelve tracks, not a single one evoked an image, an emotion, nada. Gone are the rousing chords, the melancholy beats, the triumphant keystrokes. In its place is light, airy music.

Chopin's nocturnes are all piano music and if you're new to Chopin, he was a pianist, so that his Nocturnes are all on the piano is no real surprise. But usually, Chopin uses the piano to push both the borders of music and human playing. That is, most of Chopin's music moves in such a way that it is impressive that a human could do the complex fingerings or keep up the heavy sounds. Chopin's music is usually a fast finger exercise or an endurance trial that involves using the fingers for long periods of time.

These nocturnes, however, are neither. The tracks are not long, the average length is only four and a half minutes. The pieces do not utilize many chords, instead relying on simple notes, derived by mostly slow fingerings. So, listening to the nocturnes, there's no hook; there's nothing that impresses the listener with the sound. As a result, the impression that lingers is that the music is overly simple; indeed, many pianists play Chopin nocturnes that are on this album as children.

Chopin's nocturnes were the elevator music of his time. These pieces are light fingered, only occasionally quicker, but always softer music than his standard songs. There is an absence of a catchy tune. I've listened to this album sixteen times now and not a single tune has stuck with me. What that means is there are no memorable melodies on this album. There are no memorable titles, with names like "F Major, Op. 15, No. 1" and "A flat major, Op. 32, No. 2." Chopin is better known for items like "The Funeral March." There's nothing so moody, nothing so emotive here. Instead, this is an album that sounds like musings of someone sitting at a piano without any real direction or thought.

More than that, there's the feeling that the artist had nothing special to say here. They are unremarkable pieces and a disappointment to those who like classical music.

I wish I had more to say about this album, but the truth is, there's not. The music isn't terribly sophisticated, it's not evocative, there are no lyrics to comment on, it's one person, one piano and here Chopin simply isn't doing it for me. That's a shame because he made my favorite classical piece of all time.

All I can say is this album is ideal music for on a dinner date. It's soft, it bodes well for conversing over, it creates a light mood and I suppose it could be danced to if you wanted to. Otherwise, move on to better classical or classical sounding fare! There's a Chopin's Greatest Hits album that I reviewed (here!) that I would recommend a thousand times more than this uninspired one.

For other Classical music reviews, please check out my takes on:
Karajan Gold Tchaikovski
Pictures At An Exhibition and Night On Bald Mountain - Mussogrsky
The Red Violin Soundtrack

4/10

For other music reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2011, 2003 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

A Stab At A Classical Album Review: One Of My Favorites: Chopin's Greatest Hits!

The Good: Excellent Selection, Wonderful Music, Good Recording, Length
The Bad: ? None, that come to mind
The Basics: An essential classical album arranged by people with an ear for flow and a clear knowledge of the quality and grandeur of Chopin, Chopin's Greatest Hits holds up!


Quite some time ago, a close personal friend decided it was time to terminate our friendship. Ouch. That always sucks. Her reasoning, in part, came from a review of mine that she refused to read. My friend is a wonderful singer/songwriter and her band's debut album came out and I reviewed it. It was a glowing review. Crushed by some criticism she had received, she flat out refused to read my review, which was too bad, because it was HIGHLY complimentary, and I wasn't being flattering. To this day, I still have the album and listen to it regularly. Bummer about the friend.

A large part of my friend's reasoning was the misconception that I couldn't evaluate music. She was convinced, because I vocally speak of my excitement for Heather Nova, Sophie B. Hawkins, Oasis, and Matchbox Twenty, that I had no appreciation for the greats of music. Ironically, she was the one who introduced me to the music of Dar Williams (whom I love, see my reviews of The Honesty Room and Out There Live) and Tidal by Fiona Apple. Her rather poor assumption was that because I never spoke of my full appreciation of the diversity of music, I had none.

She was wrong. I was raised listening to classical music, NPR, 80s pop-rock, 60s folk and a HUGE array of other music. The problem is, I was too young for most of the classical music to know who was playing. So, here, at the beginning of my review, I will confess this to all of you: I can't cite most classical composers based on a few bars, I don't know the historical movements in music that various artists combated in their works, and I don't know the life history of most composers. That said, I like a LOT of classical music and I know what I like.

So far, the classical album I've been so enchanted with that it has been in my collection for over a decade is Chopin's Greatest Hits. Since elementary school, I've loved the music of Chopin and this album captures all the truly great music of the master. Despite the silly sketch of Chopin on the front of the c.d. and the sticker advertising the series of Greatest Hits albums (No, Yo-Yo Ma, despite what the sticker says, is not on THIS c.d., though he appears on some album in Sony's Greatest Hits classical collection), this is the top notch of classical music.

Chopin wrote piano music. A lot of his music uses soaring scales and deep, somber chords. As strange as it is to say, despite the heavy roar of some of his chords and notes on his early pieces on this album (Like the "Military" Polonaise in A Major that opens), this album eased away a headache of mine today.

What is exceptional about this album is that it was assembled by someone who knew what they were doing. Listening to the album is like taking a journey; the songs flow naturally together, almost like a story reaching peaks and valleys, turning points and actions. That is to say, the songs on the album weren't put in chronological or order by "type" they were put together in an order that flowed very naturally, very organically from one place to another. The overall sense of the album is moving gently from episode to episode. Never is the album tired, lulling the listener to sleep, never is it putting a soft, sensual piece adjacent to a rollicking, thunderous one. There is no abrupt sense between the tracks, like one moment you're in peace and then the next you're facing an army attacking. That's a problem with some classical albums. I listened to a Tchaikowsky album where it had the problem that the two pieces on it were so discongruous as to be shocking and troublesome.

Chopin's Greatest Hits are not like that. The music sensual ("Fantasie-Impromptu In C-sharp minor, Op. 66") to grand ("Polonaise In A-Flat Major, Op. 53") to somber ("Funeral March" from Piano Sonata No. 2). Yup, Chopin is the guy who wrote the classical funeral march. Didn't know that? Now you do. "Polonaise In A-Flat Major, Op. 53" was one of the prime reasons I bought this album; I love that piece. It is passionate, impressive, like a themesong for an arrogant emperor for making entrances. There is the sense when listening to it that you are in the presence of someone grand. And you are.

If you're intimidated by classical music, this is a great album to start out with. It sounds good. It IS the best of Chopin. It's the best of classical music because it is original, inspired and presented perfectly. Don't let the names of the songs intimidate you; they're not catchy. What they are, however, is great. If you don't own a classical album, pick this one up; it's worth it.

(And if you're interested in a wonderful small band with a kick-ass vocalist fronting it, keep an eye out for my review of Abby by The Jubilant Dogs. The friendship I had with a member of the band might be over, but the album still deserves a lot of praise and exposure!)

For other orchestral works I've reviewed, please click here to read my review of The Last Of The Mohicans Soundtrack!

10/10

For other music reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here!

© 2010, 2001 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.

| | |