gnhrtg

Only because I remember you would often have 2-3 versions of most works that you would put up for sale. If you keep as many, you would have at least 4-5 versions for most major works. I might be like you in that apart from the versions I own I have drawn from the collection of the music library in Paris, and do so here, to check other notables and come away unconvinced more often than not. I should say first that it does not bother me in itself if someone's interpretation is idiosyncratic. Second, if I feel - rightly or not - that things are not under control, this does take away from my appreciation of the playing. Finally, in most piano repertoire I prefer versions that are dramatic and/or employ a wider range (of color, touch). I like Pollini's recording of the last five sonatas (DGG, from 1976/7) but this would hardly be news to anyone as this is a much, and so far I think rightly, praised set. I also enjoy Pletnev's 1988 recording (on Virgin, reissued this year) of the Moonlight, Waldstein, and Appassionata (which I took the time to compare to Brendel's early 70's recordings on Philips of the same and Brendel's versions sounded rather plodding and monochrome). For op.111 I like Pogorelich (on DGG), Richter (a 1975 recording, I think, which is part of a 5 disc Brilliant Classics box, for Richter generally, I listen with interest to most of what he has recorded, especially from mid 50's on to early 70's), and again Pletnev (a short note here to say that though recommendations for Pogorelich or Richter might be out there, there are some who find Pletnev's versions, pretty much of anything he plays, perverse and not true to the spirit of the work). I have listened to many recordings of the op.111 but not so for op.106 so though I enjoy Pollini, as I said above, and also Gilels I'm sure there are many others that are worth considering. I also listened to Solomon's recordings of opp. 90, 101, 106, 109-111 as well as Kovacevich's versions (two discs from his earlier cycle and two from his recent one) and though I could live with these (bearing in minid Solomon's condition when he recorded the sonatas), I would rather not since there are many other versions out there, and already there are others I prefer. I also found it interesting, perhaps slightly bothersome, that Kovacevich came across as not totally comfortable in his recent cycle (at least in the two discs I listened to). I might go for Schnabel every now and then for the sonatas that are not so technically challenging but even then he is rarely among my current favorites. I'm a fan of Grigory Sokolov and thogh I thought I had all his recordings on disc I see that I don't own the one with Beethoven sonatas, nor the more recent DVD. I have his Diabelli Variations and though I listen to them every now and then - and do not think they're bad at all - I was expecting more from Sokolov. I have not heard Charles Rosen's earlier recordings of the sonatas though I would like to. The disc that came with his book, The Classical Style, was not impressive (op.106 and 110) but it was recorded when he was close to his 70's, I believe. Neither have I heard Yves Nat's versions but I will keep an eye open for that box as well as for some of the other recommendations made here. I do not agree with this. Though I know some, perhaps even many, highly-regarded musicians and composers think likewise (and even if they well sympathetic toward the era they go for Haydn). I like Pollini in these. Finally, for Schubert, I'd go with Lupu, Richter, and Sokolov (only D.894 and, especially, D.960)

I should say that I'm no fan of the fortepiano but you make it sound like Brautigam's Beethoven is better than his Mozart (which I hope it is). His Mozart is interesting and worth a listen, and perhaps more if you enjoy the fortepiano sound, but nothing to rave about. Though I have seen enough reviews heaping praise upon praise on his Mozart so it might be just me. Staier, too, did not make much of an impression on me with his Mozart, mostly earlier recordings but again, I have not heard his Schubert. I will give it a shot. Gökhan, I'm interested in your Beethoven piano sonatas preferences, if any. If you are not asking this in jest, I am flattered. I am sure I own (and have heard) significantly, if not far, fewer versions than Chuck, clem, or yourself, Hans but still I'll listen to some I find notable today and tomorrow and get back to you.

I should say that I'm no fan of the fortepiano but you make it sound like Brautigam's Beethoven is better than his Mozart (which I hope it is). His Mozart is interesting and worth a listen, and perhaps more if you enjoy the fortepiano sound, but nothing to rave about. Though I have seen enough reviews heaping praise upon praise on his Mozart so it might be just me. Staier, too, did not make much of an impression on me with his Mozart, mostly earlier recordings but again, I have not heard his Schubert. I will give it a shot.

Although after you have at least one other version ('cause his is idiosyncratic but it also actually helps appreciate Mustonen better, I think).

Thank you, Nate. A few from this board have already taken the survey and I thank them. If you decide to give it a shot but find certain questions or response alternatives confusing, unclear, or poorly thought-out, please send me a pm (or an e-mail at gokhan.ertug@insead.edu) and I will clarify them. If you'd rather not do this, please skip that particular question. Otherwise it's difficult for me to figure out what exactly you were responding to and how to interpret your response.

I'm sorry about not having posted any comments yet. I did listen to the discs but I didn't have the opportunity to take any notes. I am very busy at the moment (have been for at least a month, will be for another two) but somehow had illusions about being able to reserve some time to listen to your discs carefully and comment on the music. I won't be able to do this for some more time even now, it seems. My apologies again. (Still, I might be able to say a word or two around the time of comments by those who've yet to receive the discs.)

I forgot to say that I like his choice of standards on this one and am fond of the way he renders the melodies (the tone and nuances therein more than anything else).

It's a good album you can do without. This and Without a Song. The 9/11 Concert (which I just picked up yesterday) are the only Rollins albums I have from the last 10-15 years so though unexceptional on its own it might indeed be one of the better albums of recent vintage.

Sure. Let me not post them verbatim but there are questions about which magazines and guides you follow, your level of familiarity with the field of free-jazz (which, for convenience, encapsulates avant-garde jazz, free-jazz, and European free improvisation, if the distinction is at all meaningful for you), how much new music you buy/listen to per month as well as questions on how familiar you are with the output of a musician and then asking you to gauge this musician's status. There is also a question, for example, on the factors you consider when making the decision to buy an album. I will include enough instructions so that all questions will be clear to you and thus you won't spend your time unnecessarily trying to understand what I had in mind. You should not have to do this and I hope to succeed in making everything sufficiently clear. Another thing is that except for three questions, which are optional, you won't have to do any typing. These are all closed-ended items, in the vein of "select the appropriate number" or "all that apply".

Thanks to all who took the time to read my post and, of course, to those who have offered to help (via pm or e-mail). My apologies if you have already seen my post on Jazzcorner and AAJ forums - and have had enough - but if you have the knowledge or interest and would like to help please contact me (post here, or send me a pm or e-mail). I have almost completed designing the survey. It will be 7 pages long and I should be ready to send you the links (as this will be an online survey) on Friday. I won't push this thread up again so please do contact me now if you can make some time for this. Thanks, Gokhan

Unfortunately I am very busy this week so I can only get to listening to the discs and taking down notes on the weekend, or Friday perhaps.

That has to be wrong. The rate is in the close neighborhood of 1.9.

I received mine today. Thank you.

For the many who do not know, I'm a fifth year PhD student at INSEAD (in the Organizational Behavior department) and my dissertation is on the sources and dynamics of status among free/avant-garde jazz musicians between the years 1989 and 2004. I have been listening to this music for nine years and it was the first context to spring to mind, and certainly the only one I thought would not bore me tears over the course of my dissertation, and I have spent more than a year coding personnel and reviews for 3400 discs. I'm thinking of designing an on-line survey to supplement the data I have and it would help to have a sense of how many responses I can expect (I hope to get more than 50). The survey will ask your assessments of two, at most three, characteristics of 150 musicians and 70 labels (you'll circle a number that corresponds to your subjective assessment of these characteristics). The rest will be equally simple questions like the mags you follow and your role with regard to this music (one of a listener/fan, reviewer, editor, dj, producer, concert organizer, or musician). It should take about half an hour to complete the survey. There might also be some open-ended questions - which you can either fill in your answers to then or drop me a mail, or pm here, to give your opinion or discuss. I would not expect all respondents to be experts of the genre but some level of familiarity will make your responses, and time, more valuable for me (and there are questions about how well you know the work of a particular musician, as with others, just a subjective assessment where you circle a number). If you know of fellow fans, reviewers/critics, editors, musicians etc. please notify them of this and pass along my e-mail address, below, so I can add them to the list. Also of great help would be any such musician, label owner/producer, or reviewer who would not mind learning more about my dissertation and perhaps giving his opinions on my ideas, the measures I'll be using and the like. (e-mail removed, please pm me) Unfortunately, I do not have much of a budget left to speak of so I cannot guarantee remuneration for your participation. What I can say is that apart from its own value, the survey data will also allow me to do more with the what I already have and I will be very grateful. I will include a field where you can enter your e-mail address (should you wish) and the minute I can find funds, I will buy as many cd-credits as I can from either a label or a distributor. If there are enough potential respondents, I will get to work on this and should have it ready in the next 2-3 weeks. It won't be later than that as I am on a tight and strict schedule. Thanks, (apologies for the multiple posting)

Me too, please.

Updated. indeed, David.

Far fewer guesses here. I feel some are musicians I should listen to, at least be able to identify, and the rest, mostly the (near) contemporary guys here, do not play the sort of jazz I listen to much. DISC 2 ------- 1) Blues Five Spot. Would've enjoyed this more had I been in the audience. The pianist is the more interesting musician but I cannot say who they are. Monk's versions, unfair comparison? so be it, are at least as much fun without doing so much to flag it or supposedly being clever. I'm taking the piss out of the guys for being clueless about who they are, sorry. 2) Don't know and not bothered not to. 3) I like the chart more than the solos - the guitar solo 'cause I'm allergic to them so unless they're remarkably good I'll pass and the trumpet solo because it's a little to derivative (of Miles). I would not mind listening to this again with two soloists of my choice. 4) 5) Delilah. Not something I would listen to much (with flute and organ) but I duge the groove and it was fun and done well enough not to annoy me. 6) Good tenor player and the pianist provides apt backing. I'm pretty sure I would know the tenor player, at least, but ye again I do not hear anything that would allow me to identify him (good for him, I suppose). I like it that they have the maturity (for the sort of music they are playing) to sustain the mood throughout and not rush things or show off or get clever. 7) In Your OWn Sweet Way. The tenorman works hard at generating heat all right. Not my favorite sort of player, based on his playing here, I sort of go for either more robust or even freer (midway's fine too but then I want to feel he could do either if he so chose). So the piano solo takes a while to get going and never really does even then, actually. Just one more tune and I could tell more firmly whether I'm interested in their music. 8) Darn That Dream. Now these guys are in no hurry either but he must be old-school. I did not mind the bass solo, which does not happen often (and the sax player a short while after he comes in has a go at the bass-players hint-quote at It Might as Well be Spring, in what I thought was an unforced gesture, nice). Pleasant enough. 9) R.Mitchell/J.Allan/R.Kellaway "That Was That" from a late 80's (was it?) concert in Stockholm. I listened to it enough and then deleted it without transferring to discs. Apart from duo/trio tracks the concert includes some solo pieces as well and Red Mitchell had planned to play a solo after R.Kelleway's first solo and but when the tune's over he says something like "Wow...I was going to play a solo piece now but I don't know if I want to anymore...Well, the only song I can think of is 'Mean to Me'".

The pianist on track 8 does not sound like Cecil Taylor at all. Looks like I got track 3 wrong, but then I listened to those Jarrett albums only once, though fairly recently.

Thanks, Tom. Here are my guesses and comments. I'll give this another spin tomorrow in hope of filling in the blanks and perhaps saying more about the rest as well. DISC 1 -------- 1) I'll guess Milt Hinton and Lionel Hampton, from his phrasing and the licks. He's not playing any double-timed passages, though, so (more obviously from the sound) this a relatively recent recording. I enjoyed this for what it is - could've been more development in the solo rather than stock licks and marking certain changes so explicitly. 2) I think I have this. It should be Arhtur Blythe on alto. The tenor soloist is well-steeped in the tradition (the phrasing and also, heh, the intonation). I'd have guessed Andrew Cyrille and Fred Hopkins but then the drummer does not sound like Cyrille. Because of the tone, I'm still tempted to go for Hopkins if only because I cannot think of anyone else (could be McBee, could be any of 3-4 others). Almost definitely Horace Tapscott on piano. Tapscott's solo is ok but the rest did not interest me much [nothing happening, for instance, during the last chorus of the tenor player's solo], even though I've heard things by Blythe I like and the tenor player sounds like he might be more interested in a more organized (buttoned-up?) context. 3) Begins with a half-remembered/thrown-in Monk quote. Perhaps Abdullah Ibrahim, but I'm not at all certain. I can't say anything about the rest of the band. They do their jobs adequately. I can't identify the tenor soloist either. He plays an all-right solo, nothing inspired. It's a fun groove but the this goes on a little too long for me. 4) 5) I have this. Or used to. This disc is varied but uneven. This falls somewhere in the middle. There's a great alto track, one of the first three, and I think another one toward the end but the rest is unremarkable. The band is S.Swallow/W.Puschnig/D.Alias/V.Lewis - Grey (Quinton). Puschnig's best, I still feel, was his early work with the Vienna Art Orchestra. 6) 7) 8) Good one, Tom, especially the pianist and after the drum solo. I can't have a go with any degree of certainty. (though I'm pretty sure I'll be familiar with the guys). 9) I have this - well certainly the tune but probably not this performance. Not a memorable performance, I'd say, though I like the tone of the soprano, but I'm still annoyed I can't confidently guess at any of these guys' names. 10) Yesterdays, of course. Damn, don't know these guys either. (edited for formatting)

I will post my guesses and thoughts by Tuesday (I know where). This being my first BFT I'm not sure if I'm taking too long. I hope not.

It's Biondi and yes, their version is worth while (did not hear the disc but caught them playing it live on Arte. I enjoy Rinaldo Alessandrini's take, on Opus111, as well as Carmignola's (I have the one on Sony, I hear his earlier is even better). Also highly regarded, by me but more importantly by guys who've heard many more versions, is Biondi and Alessandrini's recording of Bach's Violin and Harpsichord sonatas, again on Opus111. Anyone here heard the recent set by Ehnes and (forgot)? For Biber's ensemble chamber works there's the double-disc set by Rare Fruits Council (headed by M.Kraemer, who played and plays with Savall). I have Manze and co. for his violin sonatas and Holloway and co. for the mystery sonatas. I'm happy with these and the few other versions I've heard over the radio were not different - superior enough to make me shell out (yes and the lady whose set is on Alpha, it's ok, I like these better).

Received mine today. Thanks, Tom.

clementine - No. At least not yet, we just moved here (from France) a couple of weeks ago. I don't know about those BIS releases either. Agreed about Ondine and Alia Vox (but, again, only for those who are into Savall, well almost by definition since it's his label but also to say if you aren't into "early" music or period performances there's pretty much nothing that'd interest you). The neat thing here in Singapore is that small as the selections (of jazz and classical music) are the stores allow you to listen to a couple of discs for as long as you please.

David Hurwitz is, essentially, the man behind classicstoday.com (at least the international version, there's also one in French). I agree about Fanfare, at the moment certainly better than both The Gramophone and BBC Music, though that does not say much. Actually what bothered me most about those two was not the quality of the reviews (their main defect is not that they're parochial or ad-driven, I think, which they are, but the imposed brevity, c.f. Fanfare's reviews, Rob Cowan, for instance, should certainly be given the freedom to write at length) but the rest of the mag. Way too many pictures, light writing, and blatantly informercial interviews. It's also true that both BBC Music and The Gramophone reserve undue praise for many British performers (and composers, and also Murray Perahia, for instance).

I do not know of, worse, I do not think there are, many options, unfortunately. It's been some years since I last had a look at the Penguin Guide but between it and Gramophone I'd recommend the Gramophone guide (the Penguin is written by three reviewers, all of whom also used to review for The Gramophone. There are at least another dozen and a half active reviewers for the Gramophone - last time I looked, the guide did not identify the reviewers, regrettably, so even if there were to be a reviewer who you would've come to trust, it's not possible to id him or his reviews). I do not know how far back the archive goes or whether they include all the reviews in each issue but you can also search and read through many reviews at Gramophone's web site (used to be the same for Fanfare but I see access is now subscribers only). I also check classicstoday.com and the archives of rec.music.classical.recordings.