Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Is Keith Jarrett the greatest solo ballad player ever?

..however, I must say that I like all the Aaron Copland arrangements of the same songs much better, sung by Renee Flemming or Leontyne Pryce.

...better than anything Jarret has recorded so far, to be clear.

Pianoluvr,

How many threads did you post this question on? I found it in the Non-Classical forum.

You knew we would not be open to the comparison anyway, didn't you???

Let me be clear when I say that Jarrett is a minor talent, whose recording of the Goldberg Variations was at best boring, trite, and not very well played. I've had (yet-to-be-trained) students who played it with more insight and elan vital. While Jarrett has a modicum of musicianship, and some technical ability, more than one needs in jazz, I don't have any great respect for his playing, or his music-making. I would not go out of my way to buy one of his disks. As a matter of fact, I don't think I own ANY of his recordings!!! Out of 1,500+!!! And I own jazz recordings!!! And I teach Jazzers!!!

No matter what, I'm always thrilled, on the whole, when any pianist of meager stature manages to establish a career for themselves before the public, even it's some non-entity hack talent like Andrew Lloyd Weber.

And having said that, there are SO MANY OTHER PIANISTS I'D RATHER LISTEN TO!!!

(...you can't be serious...)

Try again...

"Could you share a little about which you liked more and why?"

Don't bother. Really.

Are you just trying to find excuses why you (Pianoluvr) don't like Mitsuko Uchida? Are you trying to find reasons why you don't like Gary Graffman? Or Marthe Argerich?

Please, go back to the non-classical forum, and keep your discussion there where it belongs.

I don't know Keith Jarrett's playing. I will need to listen tomorrow.



Zimerman playing the fourth ballade is quite nice, eh?

I've made thousands of posts in the classical forum that make it clear how I feel about classical music.

Two of the most outstanding professional classical pianists at PW have already commented on this thread how much they like Jarrett. I also posted my OP on the non classical forum because I was interested in comments from those who frequent that forum also.

So?

What comparison?

It's a fact that Jarrett's playing moves many people, and he is world renown for his ballad playing. You obviously don't think so, but why you would choose to express your opinion in such a nasty way is puzzling.

Greg, are you the same person who wrote those many thoughtful and insightful posts on the "Rotation (Sources and Commentary)" thread? Or are you really the person you appear to be here and in "Five Most Difficult Piano Pieces" - overbearing, strident, and nasty? The contrast is so stark, I can't believe these are the same two people.

So, will the real laguna_greg please step forward? I'm hoping it'll be the thoughtful, insightful one, and not the snarky one.

I can't say that I'm 'overwhelmed' by Jarrett's playing of ballads, but then the music itself isn't exactly my cup of tea either - well, maybe as background music before bedtime, perhaps. They are rather somnambulistic....

I do actually own a Keith Jarrett CD - his Köln concert, which I bought out of curiosity (as one does ). After one hearing, I didn't bother to listen again.

His Shostakovich Preludes & Fugues (of which I've heard a few) don't stand comparison with Tatiana Nikolayeva, Richter, Ashkenazy or Melnikov.

OldMan: There did seem to be a sudden change and a great difference. Either someone has tapped into his account, or he just gets into different ways at different times.

That has always been very controversial. Jarrett's improvs unfold -or is accretion a better word- at a very leisurely pace, but a number of Baby Boomer friends (including an organist at one of the cathedrals in the UK) have told me that they have an astounding cumulative effect.

With due respect to Jarrett, this is one of my absolute favourite recordings, IMO unmatched by anyone:




I don't know Jarrett's recordings of those, but I HAVE heard Nikolayeva and Askenazy. Seems unfair to compare Jarrett with those titans.

Maybe so, but if you're going to make a complete recording of a big set of masterpieces, you've got to expect comparison with the very few who've done the same (and unlike Bach's P&Fs, there aren't many complete recordings....).

But even those two titans have to look to their laurels - Alexander Melnikov, I think, has trumped them in his recent recording.

I do not know that name, and admittedly I am not as familiar with the music as you, but is Melnikov clearly superior to Ashkenazy?

Just asking... some folks here -Hank Drake for example- find Ashkenazy boring, but his earlier recording of the Chopin Etudes is astounding, and comparing his recording of Prokofiev 8 to Lazar Berman, well there is no doubt -if that need be pointed out- who is the greater musician, not that anyone would consider Berman a great musician.

Just compare Ashkenazy and Berman in the last movement of Prokofiev 8. Wow.

I like Ashkenazy, but not in everything he played. But I agree with the Chopin Etudes, and also the Nocturnes. Completely wonderful!!

And yes, Prokofiev 8, legendary

Berman is a curious pianist - he actually played (& recorded!) Ravel's Ondine with the RH tremolo-like figure converted into a real tremolo. Presumably, Ravel's meticulously-written 'hiccups' is too much of a rhythmic hurdle for him, the pianist whose Russian recording of the Liszt Transcendental Etudes is the most virtuosic there's ever been.

But is that saying anything about the musical values of the Liszt?

BTW, Ashkenazy's Decca recording of the Chopin Etudes was generally considered superior to his first version, when it came out. Tastes have evidently changed since. Will Pollini's first version (recently released for the first time on Testament) also now be considered superior to his famous DG version - despite the fact that he refused permission for its release for half a century? (Actually, in many ways, I think it's superior ).

Now, back to the original topic - has Jarrett ever played any Chopin or Liszt (or Prokofiev)? It would be interesting to hear how a jazzer plays Chopin.

Oops, it has been done - by Leszek Mozdzer, who's played his own 'jazzed-up' Chopin - quite successfully, IMO. Now, I wonder what Jarrett's version would sound like......

I wouldn't look to Jarrett for any classical interpretations. But as a jazz pianist I think he's exceptional, and his arrangements and playing exhibit a superb level of musicality and sensitivity. Is he the "best" ballad player ever? I don't know, but he's extremely good.

Jarrett is primarily a jazz pianist so I think comparing his classical performances to some of the greatest classical pianists falls into the category of looking for a way to criticize him. That being said I'd guess he plays classical at a level reached by few, if any, primarily classical pianists playing jazz.

Dubal's comments about Jarrett's classical pianism are far more positive than the PW posters who criticized his playing..."A wide ranging musician who plays the classical composers with zest and focus. It does not take long to hear in Jarrett's Bach Preludes an Fugues or Shostakovich Preludes and Fugues a mind full of profundity and whimsy."

Keith is a fabulous player, in jazz and in some regards in classical music too. His pianism was great from the very start and has gotten much more nuanced and colourful since the mid-80's or so (incidentally, he started getting back to classical music around this time, and said he had to re-learn his technique and how to play the piano). The point I tried to convey was that while he has this huge range of colours, sonorities, touches, sophisticated pedal use, whatnot, then he seems to use all of this in full only when doing his own improvised concerts. He is a million times more restrained as a classical player, and he explains it in the way that the music isn't coming out of himself, he was himself not involved in the process of creating it. In the improvised solo concert on the other hand, everything is his own creation. I'm merely pointing it out, and I actually thought for a long time that his attitude with classical music was rather refreshing. Nowadays, I feel that it works sometimes, but in the long run it tends to get rather dull. I have a quite hard time imagining Bach, Mozart or anyone else thinking that the best performance of their works would be one where the performer just channels the music through them without being much involved in what's going on.

It's interesting how you arbitrarily drag Berman in just to trash him. His recording of the Année de Pélerinage is sufficient to consider him a great musician regardless of any other shortcomings.

On the topic at hand, I don't see any point in comparing Jarrett to Rubinstein or any other classical musician. There is hardly any overlap unless we compare only technique, where Jarrett doesn't measure up. On the musical side, if you like folk ballads as piano solos, he doesn't have much competition.

Jarrett was a child prodigy, his first public concert was at the age of 7 when he played Beethoven and a few pieces he had composed. He always played classical music even if this has not been represented by his record releases (so he has said in interview). You may think of him primarily as a jazz player but really his music does not fit well into genre stereotypes. He can improvise music in any style and moves seamlessly between boogie boogie, polyphony, atonal and everything else. He has written string quartets, orchestral music, concertos, played and recorded classical music in many styles with some of the finest classical musicians, has made dozens of original cross-genre recordings (including clavichord, organ, harpsichord, saxophone, flutes - he plays all of these) and also is just about the only pianist in the world who fills concert halls playing entirely improved concerts. And he plays jazz ballads.

Plenty of people seem to not like the way he plays classical music but I think his Shostakovich sounds pretty respectable …

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2lqOdexxlo


and there really aren't any classical players who can improvise 'classical sounding' pieces in any comparable way to this ….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVgkiVWeiSU

In many ways Jarrett is a lot closer to the spirit of Bach than the non-improvising classical musicians of today imo.

'Respectable', yes - but in the world of classical music, when listening to someone playing something familiar, you also need the 'wow' factor, or magic, or something that makes you sit up and perk up your ears. There's nothing wrong with Jarrett's Shostakovich; it's just that it isn't good enough to compare with many - in fact, most - classical pianists' interpretations - including many who don't have recording contracts and will therefore never be heard by the wider public.

Listen to how much more Ashkenazy makes of this P&F; much more shape, color, character and nuance, and even wit: http://youtu.be/G0aN0rJmZ4o

And that is also why, though many classical musicians can improvise very well (and, dare I say it, better than Jarrett in his 'pseudo-classical' style), they wouldn't dare to inflict their improvisations on a classical music audience, because they will be compared with through-composed music by the greats. How could any improvisation match up to, say, a Beethoven piano sonata, or even his Bagatelles (some of which were probably off-the-cuff improvisations that he chose to write down), or Mozart's Fantasia K475, which was likely also an improvisation?

Probably the only time we would get to hear improvisations by classical pianists - by a very few bold enough to do them - is in cadenzas for Haydn or Mozart concertos, or as encores. Noone would go to hear a whole concert of classical improvisations, unlike jazz, where its raison-d'être is improvisation.