Josef Hofmann Plays Chopin (1937)

[@dorfmanjones]

Very likely the Anton Rubinstein approach to interpretation. Great surges of power, extraordinary delicacy and articulation, clouds of pedal. A highly idiosyncratic amalgamation of imagination and willfulness.

[@kaleidoscopio5]

Indeed

[@j.m.b.8628]

Rachmaninoff used to say that Hofmann was one of the greatest living pianists. I love Hofmann's playing, thanks for sharing your work, it's brilliant. Greetings from Argentina, Buenos Aires.

[@philipau3847]

Hofmann's passagework is so unique and instantly recognisable as unmistakably Hofmann. His jeu de perle (pearly playing) underpinned by perfectly even scales (nobody can touch the perfection of that run at 27:15) and a sparing use of the pedal is intoxicating. Other notable features I've found in his playing are: 1. fioritura - his approach to fioriture playing is to fit the fioritura into the bar lines of the measure, rather than expanding the measure to fit the fioritura (eg. 20:15, 21:52), . Pretty much everyone else takes the latter approach (either for stylistic reasons or due to technical deficiencies) whereas for Hofmann, it doesn't matter how many notes there are but the tempo is never adjusted to the notes - the basic pulse of the music is maintained. 2. trills - it seems novel, but again distinguishes his playing from everyone else. Hofmann does not accelerando on his trills (eg. 4:30). His first alternation is alreadiy at full speed. Again, I rarely hear anyone else doing this. Once that sound is in your head, as Schonberg puts it, every other pianist sounds 'thick'. Not to mention the plethora of interesting things he does with phrasing, rhythm, inner voices etc.

[@kaleidoscopio5]

One of the last free pianists ever. Hoffmann had the technique to adapt all the pieces he played to his mood....a lasting heritage that we should not forget 😎

[@RS3DArchive]

I love the audience reaction when he starts the "Minute Waltz".

[@leestamm3187]

Great stuff, beautifully restored, as always. Hoffman's style seem to ring through from an earlier era. Really delightful. Thanks much.

[@RS3DArchive]

Thanks, Lee. I'll be doing the Casimir Concert soon. The funny thing is that some thought he was butchering this music. Of course I could not disagree more. I never read anywhere that classical music wasn't supposed to be fun. Hofmann is a great big breath of fresh air in music that can tend to get cut-and-dried. I admire the traditions, too. But Hofmann played with so much authority that he could get things out of it that nobody else did.

[@leestamm3187]

@@RS3DArchive Agreed. For me, matters like that fall within the bounds of interpretive latitude. There have always been those who pushed the envelope a bit. I think it would be pretty dull if every artist played the same way.

[@John-thinks]

7:05 so many of these wonderful buried baselines in Chopin, always appreciate when a pianist digs one up and frames it

[@dejanstevanic5408]

Lovely. TY

[@kpokpojiji]

I member a story of Horowitz, when hecwad younger, being down in the Steinway basement trying out pianos. He asked about one piano off to the side, and they told him it was Hofmann's. Horowitz went over to it, looked at the keyboard for a minute, then simply caressed one of the keys without making a sound.

[@lucas__machado]

24:02, I can't even figure out how a pianissimo at such a speed is possible, unbelievable

[@ianboard544]

He has a unique sound.

[@John-thinks]

Tons of novelty in his playing.

[@RS3DArchive]

True. There was only one Hofmann.

[@meredith218461]

Hofmanns spontaneity (nowadays academics might well say iconoclastic, even crass meddling with the score) was frequently captivating, entertaining and pianistically mind boggling. Also Ignaz Friedman was very similar in this respect. So how does one assess these larger than life virtuosi who could hold audiences in rapt attention and awe?. Firstly one has to view their playing in context of the times when such freedoms of expression were commonplace, spontaneous invention and pianistic sorcery were of paramount importance. The composers written intentions became somewhat secondary; heard through todays coldly critical ears the Hofmann's, Friedmann's, and Paderewski's from that era sound embarrassingly crass and vulgar. However there were a new breed of pianists at the time like Rachmaninov, Moiseiwitsch, Schnabel and Arrau who gradually changed audiences perception of great music making. These figures brought a more academic approach which adhered closely to the written score avoiding irrelevant embellishments, also their onstage approach was less mannered and flamboyant. Artistic expectations had shifted. One thing I personally miss among many of todays young titans and lionesses of the keyboard is beauty of sound and subtle tonal shadings which many of those past masters certainly possessed. So many of todays aspiring concert pianists are trained rather like athletes to win major international competitions, only then to largely fade into obscurity.

[@siegfriedhorner4436]

Well put. I agree.

[@swshin4727]

Did you see how Nikolay Khozyainov played in the third round of 2021 Chopin? There are still interesting musicians, they just never come to spotlight because they don't succumb to the political games played by others and therefore never win these "competitions"

[@jamesherried9269]

If you were to read contemporary accounts of how Beethoven played his own piano music, you might be surprised, and even enlightened. Beethoven definitely did not take a puritanical approach to the interpretations of his own music, if we are to go by the detailed descriptions of his performances, that were passed on to us by his contemporaries.

[@meredith218461]

I think you make a valid point. As I'm sure you know the young Beethoven was initially known and admired for his improvisatory skills as a pianist. This fact certainly supports your view surrounding interpretations by various performers. Interpretive insights however evolve with each generation. We now live in an era of intense academic research thereby air-brushing any concept of spontaneity.

[@Post-i8q]

Академическое исполнение статично фрагментарно

[@John-thinks]

19:22 how do they clap after that ending...

[@John-thinks]

He doesn't let his 9 2 float in the way it should in the beginning. It's not airy enough in the beginning. He fixes this pretty quickly though.

[@John-thinks]

2:31

[@John-thinks]

1:27

[@John-thinks]

Hofmann seems to have missed the soft delicate and slow shape of the Andante Spianato.

[@ThomasErnst-br4gw]

Beautiful transfers. Opp. 42 and 64/1 surely must have been intended as musical caricatures. They display a very artful technique, but no music.

[@petergoldstein1075]

Helen Grimaud 's Berceuse is better she is closer to her feelings. The best Berceuse recording is Marylla Jonas. Thank you David Dubal for promoting her. Your finest hour other than director of wncn programming. A Berceuse is a lullaby. Who would sing a lullaby this fast ?

[@John-thinks]

7:38 definitely points where Hofmann is more focused on making the piece his own than getting the notes. Forgivable, given he's playing them tastefully.

[@John-thinks]

12:50

[@John-thinks]

5:23