Bach-Busoni: Chaconne in D minor (Margulis, Kissin, Larrocha, Rösel, Weissenberg, Ginzburg) скачать в хорошем качестве

Bach-Busoni: Chaconne in D minor (Margulis, Kissin, Larrocha, Rösel, Weissenberg, Ginzburg)

Among the chaconnes (and passacaglias) of the period, the one from Bach's Violin Partita No.2 is pretty unusual. There’s bare fact of its sheer scale – it was the longest single movement ever written for solo violin when published – but that if anything obscures what makes it such a fascinating work. The Chaconne is a set of variations on a descending tetrachord (D-C-Bb-A), itself a well-established schema, but the harmony is varied so aggressively that for large sections of the work it can be hard figuring out what exactly Bach is varying. (Compare the last of Biber’s Mystery Sonatas or Pachelbel’s Fm Chaconne, which use the same descending tetrachord in a much more direct way. By a conservative count there are eight variants of the tetrachord in this work.) As with the Goldbergs, Bach structures the 64 variations (65 in Busoni’s version) in a telescoped way. From a birds-eye view the work is a simple A-B-C, with the major-key middle section featuring a chorale. Within this structure, variations are grouped together, often in pairs, but sometimes in larger chunks of varying length exploring a particular texture (arpeggios, bariolage, scales), motif (repeated notes), or harmony (the circle of fifths sequence starting from Var.13). Sometimes phrases are written so that they cut across variations, and it can be almost impossible on a casual listen to realise you’re in a new variation (Vars.1-2, 28-29, 33-34, 40-41). The combination of these techniques means you never feel like you’re listening to a series of 60+ variations – instead you hear something much more narrative, with many local peaks of intensity. What Busoni does with Bach’s material is spectacular. Despite massively expanding the work’s dynamic and registral space, there’s really not a single decorative note – Busoni is almost always elaborating on structural features of the music, and textural invention is deployed in service of a larger argument. Some examples: in the arpeggio section (5:28), Busoni gradually expands the register to highlight the entire section as its own mini-episode; in Vars.40-41 (9:02), the chorale returns in the LH to demonstrate the shared underlying harmony; the repeated-note motif that unifies Vars.42-45 (9:21) is vastly expanded, so that where it sparsely decorated the original violin passage it is now a leaping pedal echoing from every corner of the keyboard. Busoni’s alterations also operate on a large scale; the variations that open Part 3 are written a sparseness that is eerie or heartbreaking (depending on interpretation), in effect serving as an interlude leading to the coda-like bariolage passage (in which Busoni intensifies Bach’s original chromaticism). At two points, Busoni even arranges things so that we glimpse the unadorned tetrachord where it would otherwise be invisible: once in the RH inner voice in Var.14 (2:59), and once at the very end, (14:28), where it ends on the piano’s lowest note. 00:00 – Margulis. Taut, lean, intense. Generally inclined to little rubato (see the LH/RH contrast at 9:02), but uses very effective over and under-dotting (Vars. 3-4 over-; Var.18 under-). Very careful pedaling in the arpeggio section; exceptionally clear voicing in the chorale. 15:06 – Kissin. Lush, mythopoetic. The most inclined to big contrasts in texture and tempo. The delicacy of the voicing of the textures in the arpeggio section is remarkable (e.g., the repeated Ds at the bottom of the texture at 21:00). Legato phrasing generally favoured. 30:01 – Larrocha. Clarity, rhythm, play. Hidden voices shine (see e.g., 32:09; 35:34!). In Var.14 (32:48) the 9-8 suspensions and accenting combine to create a glorious dancelike texture. Somehow Larrocha sustains the melting As in the repeated-note section more than other pianists (38:42), while taking a slower tempo (this in turns suddenly snaps back at the “tempo misurato” at 39:27). Pedaling generally sparse (Var.10 at 33:36 is entirely pedal-less). 44:01 – Rösel. The “just do it” school – opens at a quick tempo, and more or less gets on with it (to fantastic effect). The most pedal and rubato-averse – Var.14 is practically staccatissimo (46:33); the pulse is kept through the piu sostenuto (54:30). This (+Ginzburg) are the only recordings without rhythmic liberties in the repeated-note section. 57:27 – Weissenberg. Relentless, architectonic. Opening bars feature heavy rhythmic distortion (prolongation of the first beat). Variations ploughed through in big chunks, revving into huge climaxes (e.g., the arpeggio sequence beginning from 1:02:11, which is taken at a frightening tempo). The bariolage buildup is one long wail of terror (1:09:00). 1:10:35 – Ginzburg. Huge. The dynamic range is eye-watering, and the sonorities massive (1:14:20, 1:20:41). At 1:24:49 the inner voice somehow sounds tripled, though the score shows only octaves. Lots of subtlety too – the lovely pianissimo of the early arpeggio variations (1:16:10), the lower voice in Var.58 (1:23:04).