Taneyev was the same for Russian chamber music that Beethoven for Western chamber music. He developed a technique for creating chamber works for Russian composers. Now it was possible not to create individual successful works, but to know how to do exemplary things - almost always. Myaskovsky and Shostakovich were the obvious followers of Taneyev in chamber music. When Shostakovich was once asked if he knew Taneyev's chamber works, he responded very vividly and added that 'to know' in his understanding is 'to know by heart'.
Taneyev is unique in Russian music for his grand designs in musical architecture. So well planned and ordered it reminds me of say the Peterhof Palace and it’s vista to the West. It is a big boned passionate work but full of delightful details, especially the counterpoint. Prokofiev admired this Trio and thought it full of life.
What a lovely performance of this haunting work, i love the quality of string tone here, giving sweetness, purity, warmth and passion all at once; well what else to expect from Repin, and Harrell matches him superbly. It's a strikingly poised and "classical" trio, yet with Romantic scale and depth of expression. I had a fine studio performance on LP, (lost years ago!), but this surpasses it by far, also with the extra "edge" of being live. I'm especially happy to find this here as i heard the broadcast on France Musique and find it every bit as good as my memory of it. It also alerted me to what was to follow after the interval: a fantastic performance of Taneyev's Quintet, so i was able to get a cassette ready to record it, (also lost!). I heartily recommend hearing the Quintet, also on this marvellous channel. Pletnev is absolutely at his peak, a stunning chamber musician as well as soloist, conductor..... Taneyev's work is given full value+. Many thanks for posting these valuable performances.
Nobody argued with Taneyev. Medtner, Scriabin, and Rachmaninov studied with him. He was Tchaikovsky’s protégé, close friend, and harshest critic. Taneyev was the Russian Bach! Rimsky-Korsakov thought most of Taneyev’s music was boring and dry, but I bet he was fairly....reluctant.....to say that to his face!!!
(Rimsky-Korsakov thought most of Taneyev’s music was boring and dry) That's not right. Rimsky-Korsakov had a GREAT admiration to Taneyev's chamber works (String Quintet with 2 cellos was dedicated to R-K), to Oresteia, to the Symphony in C Minor.
Гр. Прокофьев: "Я давно не испытывал того наслаждения, которое пришлось испытать при слушании этого трио: уже первое Allegro с суховатой, жесткой даже темой приковывает к себе внимание своей выдержанностью и силой. Вторая - Allegro molto, которую можно назвать „пляской смерти", еще лучше, еще сильнее, а средняя часть ее - тема с вариациями, из которых одна живее, изящнее и красивее другой, - великолепна. Andante угрюмо и красиво, а финальное Allegro con brio полно жизни, так что даже странно, что его coda еще энергичнее и живее, чем начало. Прибавьте к тому горячую, стильную, разнообразную игру автора, единственным недостатком которого является чрезмерное иногда увлечение своей партией в ущерб ансамблю, - и будет понятно воодушевление всех присутствующих»
Оценка Трио была почти единодушной. Н. Д. Кашкин, не колеблясь, назвал сочинение Танеева «едва ли не лучшим из всего, что им до сих пор написано. В этом превосходном произведении привлекательно не только огромное техническое мастерство, но и свежая непринужденность изобретения, богатство гармонии и замечательная красивость звучности всего сочинения от начала до конца. Эта красота в значительной степени находится в зависимости от удивительного равновесия, какого композитору удалось достигнуть для всех трех участвующих инструментов. Это было действительно трио трех совершенно равноправных членов, причем каждый из них все время вполне сохраняет свою индивидуальную самостоятельность и в то же время все три вместе составляют удивительно прекрасное целое. Подобного мастерства в этом отношении достигали в прежнее время классики в лучших из своих произведений. И новое трио вполне проникнуто классическим духом с этой точки зрения, хотя в то же время по своему духу и содержанию музыка эта совсем новая. В особенности выделяются своей оригинальностью по форме и содержанию вторая часть, скерцо, представляющее со своей темой с вариациями вместо трио нечто совершенно новое и сделанное с безукоризненным мастерством. Впрочем, все части этого сочинения замечательно хороши и проникнуты таким бодрым одушевлением, какое редко встречается в новой музыке. Этому трио, по всей вероятности, предстоит в ближайшем будущем самое широкое распространение, ибо, помимо своих музыкальных достоинств, оно представляет чрезвычайно благодарную, хотя и трудную задачу для всех трех участвующих. Все трое исполнителей, в том числе автор трио в фортепианной партии и гг. Сараджев и Букиник в партиях скрипки и виолончели, заслуживали очень больших похвал за одушевленную стройность и превосходный ансамбль. Новое произведение имело огромный и вполне заслуженный успех в среде многочисленной публики, наполнившей зал».
Subscribe for rare Russian music! • Sergei Taneyev: ua-cam.com/video/qmCwFt7DEkY/v-deo.html • Nikolai Medtner: ua-cam.com/video/blJz6klCWFQ/v-deo.html • Nikolai Golovanov: ua-cam.com/video/8qnjDYS637w/v-deo.html
Интересно, что при таком контрапунктическом мастерстве фортепианная фактура у Танеева отнюдь не сухая и не линеарная, как почти у всех композиторов в 20 в., а по-романтически роскошная. :-)
Thankyou for a most engaging 38 minutes. As ever, the score is most helpful in navigating an unfamiliar work. Having now listened to both this trio and the quintet, it strikes me that Taneyev was essentially a classicist, having little in common with the late 19th-century Russian school as represented by 'The Mighty Handful'. I understand that he was a fine music theorist and I think this shines through the music which, to my ears, sometimes sounds contrived rather than inspired. The technical skill is very evident (thematic transformations throughout, rhythmic legerdemains in the second movement) but I don't think he had anything approaching Tchaikovsky's, Borodin's or Balakirev's melodic gifts. There is nevertheless much to enjoy in terms of variety and character. It's good to have heard this piece and I found the performance very vital and committed (despite an occasional lapse in fine ensemble!).
Indeed, i might agree that Taneyev is generally of more interest to musicians than to the general public, lacking that degree of grand, memorable thematic sweep; nevertheless in the occasional meeting of great musical minds- as here, an extraordinary effect may result. This piece takes me back to my teenage, about 14 years old, when i was redecorating my mother's house...the BBC broadcast a disc of the Taneyev Quartet (members of..) with, (confusingly): Tamara Fidler(!)- piano. I stuck the cassette "record" button down and listened obsessively as i painted & papered, certainly an artificial way of listening, but it has always haunted me since then. I suppose i realose that Taneyev was never going to be public "fan" material, but was waiting for interpreters of towering stature. (Incidentally, seeking other versions, i found Oistrakh's, but it was ruined then, by a primitive pressing of an MK- Melodiya LP- with ghastly sound, giving a poor impression musically). What i love in this performance is not only the string quality of expression and pianist's precision, vision and direction, but also the "living dangerously" element, which, as you mention, can result in a few lapses, (also in the Quintet), but it's preferable in every way to the studio recording of both works made within days of these Verbier performances, perfectly correct, listenable....etc, but which would never excite me to listen again to these works. For me, they are at once: "classical," obviously Romantic in scope & expression.... yet with a mystic aspect hovering hauntingly somewhere, not often revealed in ordinary performances.
Passions from one's teenage years leave a strong imprint, and I certainly wouldn't want to be without mine! I remember listening to the Taneyev Concert Suite for violin and orch (Oistrakh/Philharmonia/Malko) when I was in my late teens but it made little impression. I've recently also listened to the E-flat piano concerto which I didn't much enjoy, despite a promising opening. This trio however, I found much more rewarding and well worth the time spent in listening - and I'm sure the performance would have helped. Maybe I should check out the quartet. I remember a former piano teacher describing it as a fine work ...
Truly, certain composers who remain somewhat "marginal" - Taneyev, Medtner, Berwald, Stenhammar..... depend more strongly on exceptional interpretations of striking quality, than central rep, (Beet, Bra, Moz, Tchaik.....), where nobody will blame the composer for a poor impression. Fine recorded sound will help, but for me, very often it's been the effect of an electrifying live experience which brought a shadowy piece springing forward more vivdly. Agreed, unfortunately, about the Taneyev Concerto in E flat; maybe i should listen again but am not tempted! The Concert Suite, same recording, (Oistrakh/Malko) was my first Taneyev experience, in my teens. I was Oistrakh-mad at the time and that helped my appreciation of the work, altho it's true, one doesn't immediately walk away humming tunes!
I quite disagree with the sentiments expressed here... I think it is mostly a matter of historical accident that Taneyev is not as widely performed as Tchaik and Rimsky. His music is singable and inventive, while exhibiting carefully constructed musical architecture. Given Taneyev's busy career as a recitalist and a professor, he simply didn't have the time to write as much music as early in his career. Rachmaninov, on the other hand, was more devoted to composition in his youth, making his greatest strides as a performer after he had already established himself as a composer. There is also the fact the Rachmaninov left Russia in 1917 and established himself thoroughly in the West. Taneyev had no such opportunity, and then shortly after his death, his romantic, "formalist" music was actively supressed by Soviet authorities. We should hear more Taneyev! As his music becomes more familiar, we will fall in love with it! It just needs time to permeate classical music culture in the West.
@@GrishaKrivchenia Thank you for your perspective. I agree with you wholeheartedly. There is/was a similar parallel with Russian ballet dancers. We only knew those who toured with Diaghilev (Nijinsky, Karsavina, Pavlova etc) and then those who defected (Nureyev, Makarova, Barishnikov). Of course, many equally fine dancers were hidden behind the Iron Curtain.
Насколько же хорошо Плетнёв владеет роялем! Мастер!
Taneyev was the same for Russian chamber music that Beethoven for Western chamber music. He developed a technique for creating chamber works for Russian composers. Now it was possible not to create individual successful works, but to know how to do exemplary things - almost always.
Myaskovsky and Shostakovich were the obvious followers of Taneyev in chamber music.
When Shostakovich was once asked if he knew Taneyev's chamber works, he responded very vividly and added that 'to know' in his understanding is 'to know by heart'.
Taneyev is unique in Russian music for his grand designs in musical architecture. So well planned and ordered it reminds me of say the Peterhof Palace and it’s vista to the West. It is a big boned passionate work but full of delightful details, especially the counterpoint. Prokofiev admired this Trio and thought it full of life.
He's unique in that regard? really?
Superb performance of one of the pinnacles of Russian Chamber Music
What a lovely performance of this haunting work, i love the quality of string tone here, giving sweetness, purity, warmth and passion all at once; well what else to expect from Repin, and Harrell matches him superbly. It's a strikingly poised and "classical" trio, yet with Romantic scale and depth of expression. I had a fine studio performance on LP, (lost years ago!), but this surpasses it by far, also with the extra "edge" of being live.
I'm especially happy to find this here as i heard the broadcast on France Musique and find it every bit as good as my memory of it. It also alerted me to what was to follow after the interval: a fantastic performance of Taneyev's Quintet, so i was able to get a cassette ready to record it, (also lost!). I heartily recommend hearing the Quintet, also on this marvellous channel. Pletnev is absolutely at his peak, a stunning chamber musician as well as soloist, conductor..... Taneyev's work is given full value+.
Many thanks for posting these valuable performances.
Nobody argued with Taneyev. Medtner, Scriabin, and Rachmaninov studied with him. He was Tchaikovsky’s protégé, close friend, and harshest critic. Taneyev was the Russian Bach! Rimsky-Korsakov thought most of Taneyev’s music was boring and dry, but I bet he was fairly....reluctant.....to say that to his face!!!
(Rimsky-Korsakov thought most of Taneyev’s music was boring and dry)
That's not right. Rimsky-Korsakov had a GREAT admiration to Taneyev's chamber works (String Quintet with 2 cellos was dedicated to R-K), to Oresteia, to the Symphony in C Minor.
實在精彩的演奏
-- Fantastique trio. --
Гр. Прокофьев: "Я давно не испытывал того наслаждения, которое пришлось испытать при слушании этого трио: уже первое Allegro с суховатой, жесткой даже темой приковывает к себе внимание своей выдержанностью и силой. Вторая - Allegro molto, которую можно назвать „пляской смерти", еще лучше, еще сильнее, а средняя часть ее - тема с вариациями, из которых одна живее, изящнее и красивее другой, - великолепна. Andante угрюмо и красиво, а финальное Allegro con brio полно жизни, так что даже странно, что его coda еще энергичнее и живее, чем начало. Прибавьте к тому горячую, стильную, разнообразную игру автора, единственным недостатком которого является чрезмерное иногда увлечение своей партией в ущерб ансамблю, - и будет понятно воодушевление всех присутствующих»
Оценка Трио была почти единодушной. Н. Д. Кашкин, не колеблясь, назвал сочинение Танеева «едва ли не лучшим из всего, что им до сих пор написано. В этом превосходном произведении привлекательно не только огромное техническое мастерство, но и свежая непринужденность изобретения, богатство гармонии и замечательная красивость звучности всего сочинения от начала до конца. Эта красота в значительной степени находится в зависимости от удивительного равновесия, какого композитору удалось достигнуть для всех трех участвующих инструментов. Это было действительно трио трех совершенно равноправных членов, причем каждый из них все время вполне сохраняет свою индивидуальную самостоятельность и в то же время все три вместе составляют удивительно прекрасное целое. Подобного мастерства в этом отношении достигали в прежнее время классики в лучших из своих произведений. И новое трио вполне проникнуто классическим духом с этой точки зрения, хотя в то же время по своему духу и содержанию музыка эта совсем новая. В особенности выделяются своей оригинальностью по форме и содержанию вторая часть, скерцо, представляющее со своей темой с вариациями вместо трио нечто совершенно новое и сделанное с безукоризненным мастерством. Впрочем, все части этого сочинения замечательно хороши и проникнуты таким бодрым одушевлением, какое редко встречается в новой музыке. Этому трио, по всей вероятности, предстоит в ближайшем будущем самое широкое распространение, ибо, помимо своих музыкальных достоинств, оно представляет чрезвычайно благодарную, хотя и трудную задачу для всех трех участвующих. Все трое исполнителей, в том числе автор трио в фортепианной партии и гг. Сараджев и Букиник в партиях скрипки и виолончели, заслуживали очень больших похвал за одушевленную стройность и превосходный ансамбль. Новое произведение имело огромный и вполне заслуженный успех в среде многочисленной публики, наполнившей зал».
@@Queeen7q , красота необыкновенная, музыка завораживает, фортепиано , скрипка и виолончель поют в необыкновенной гармонии друг с другом.
Subscribe for rare Russian music!
• Sergei Taneyev: ua-cam.com/video/qmCwFt7DEkY/v-deo.html
• Nikolai Medtner: ua-cam.com/video/blJz6klCWFQ/v-deo.html
• Nikolai Golovanov: ua-cam.com/video/8qnjDYS637w/v-deo.html
I should add to my comment: thank you and Bravo for including the score, both here and for the Quintet. Now i'm going to listen again....and follow!
Great emotion and great technique!
Интересно, что при таком контрапунктическом мастерстве фортепианная фактура у Танеева отнюдь не сухая и не линеарная, как почти у всех композиторов в 20 в., а по-романтически роскошная. :-)
Где вы фактуру то увидели?)
Сотый лайк...
Вадим Репин - босс!!!
Thankyou for a most engaging 38 minutes. As ever, the score is most helpful in navigating an unfamiliar work. Having now listened to both this trio and the quintet, it strikes me that Taneyev was essentially a classicist, having little in common with the late 19th-century Russian school as represented by 'The Mighty Handful'. I understand that he was a fine music theorist and I think this shines through the music which, to my ears, sometimes sounds contrived rather than inspired. The technical skill is very evident (thematic transformations throughout, rhythmic legerdemains in the second movement) but I don't think he had anything approaching Tchaikovsky's, Borodin's or Balakirev's melodic gifts. There is nevertheless much to enjoy in terms of variety and character. It's good to have heard this piece and I found the performance very vital and committed (despite an occasional lapse in fine ensemble!).
Indeed, i might agree that Taneyev is generally of more interest to musicians than to the general public, lacking that degree of grand, memorable thematic sweep; nevertheless in the occasional meeting of great musical minds- as here, an extraordinary effect may result. This piece takes me back to my teenage, about 14 years old, when i was redecorating my mother's house...the BBC broadcast a disc of the Taneyev Quartet (members of..) with, (confusingly): Tamara Fidler(!)- piano. I stuck the cassette "record" button down and listened obsessively as i painted & papered, certainly an artificial way of listening, but it has always haunted me since then. I suppose i realose that Taneyev was never going to be public "fan" material, but was waiting for interpreters of towering stature. (Incidentally, seeking other versions, i found Oistrakh's, but it was ruined then, by a primitive pressing of an MK- Melodiya LP- with ghastly sound, giving a poor impression musically).
What i love in this performance is not only the string quality of expression and pianist's precision, vision and direction, but also the "living dangerously" element, which, as you mention, can result in a few lapses, (also in the Quintet), but it's preferable in every way to the studio recording of both works made within days of these Verbier performances, perfectly correct, listenable....etc, but which would never excite me to listen again to these works. For me, they are at once: "classical," obviously Romantic in scope & expression.... yet with a mystic aspect hovering hauntingly somewhere, not often revealed in ordinary performances.
Passions from one's teenage years leave a strong imprint, and I certainly wouldn't want to be without mine! I remember listening to the Taneyev Concert Suite for violin and orch (Oistrakh/Philharmonia/Malko) when I was in my late teens but it made little impression. I've recently also listened to the E-flat piano concerto which I didn't much enjoy, despite a promising opening. This trio however, I found much more rewarding and well worth the time spent in listening - and I'm sure the performance would have helped. Maybe I should check out the quartet. I remember a former piano teacher describing it as a fine work ...
Truly, certain composers who remain somewhat "marginal" - Taneyev, Medtner, Berwald, Stenhammar..... depend more strongly on exceptional interpretations of striking quality, than central rep, (Beet, Bra, Moz, Tchaik.....), where nobody will blame the composer for a poor impression. Fine recorded sound will help, but for me, very often it's been the effect of an electrifying live experience which brought a shadowy piece springing forward more vivdly. Agreed, unfortunately, about the Taneyev Concerto in E flat; maybe i should listen again but am not tempted! The Concert Suite, same recording, (Oistrakh/Malko) was my first Taneyev experience, in my teens. I was Oistrakh-mad at the time and that helped my appreciation of the work, altho it's true, one doesn't immediately walk away humming tunes!
I quite disagree with the sentiments expressed here... I think it is mostly a matter of historical accident that Taneyev is not as widely performed as Tchaik and Rimsky. His music is singable and inventive, while exhibiting carefully constructed musical architecture.
Given Taneyev's busy career as a recitalist and a professor, he simply didn't have the time to write as much music as early in his career. Rachmaninov, on the other hand, was more devoted to composition in his youth, making his greatest strides as a performer after he had already established himself as a composer.
There is also the fact the Rachmaninov left Russia in 1917 and established himself thoroughly in the West. Taneyev had no such opportunity, and then shortly after his death, his romantic, "formalist" music was actively supressed by Soviet authorities.
We should hear more Taneyev! As his music becomes more familiar, we will fall in love with it! It just needs time to permeate classical music culture in the West.
@@GrishaKrivchenia Thank you for your perspective. I agree with you wholeheartedly. There is/was a similar parallel with Russian ballet dancers. We only knew those who toured with Diaghilev (Nijinsky, Karsavina, Pavlova etc) and then those who defected (Nureyev, Makarova, Barishnikov). Of course, many equally fine dancers were hidden behind the Iron Curtain.
🎼🎶🎵Плетнёв 🎹♥️
sounds too identical to Beethoven.