2. music
  3. 1240175314

Slowest played Goldberg Variation

Recently collected a recording of the Goldberg Variation played by Simone Dinnerstein (Telarc CD-80692), it is a gift from my wife. At first glance, who is Simone Dinnerstein? I just played it anyway. To my surprise, the recording paths the music slowly but it reveals the minutest subtlety in Bach’s notes (Thanks! Honey). You don’t find it sluggish, like Celibidache’s conducting, it just carries you into a meditation mode, the moment just you and time coexist. For a classical piece like Goldberg Variation, I didn’t expect such unusual interpretation from a young artist (recollect the last recitals of Backhaus and Serkin?).

The recording from Telarc is still exceptional. It faithfully recorded the sound of the 1903 Hamburg Steinway model D. It makes the Steinway more like a Bosendorfer.

It was the slowest Goldberg Variation I ever heard. Comparing with the Gould’s classical recordings in 1981, it is 26 minutes and 6 seconds longer. But truly indeed, it is an excellent reading of Goldberg Variation for Bach’s music admirers.

Wake up you classical music fan and happy listening.
yu11375
4 responses Add your response
yu11375 OP
137 posts
 
Here is the critics from New York Times by Allan Kozinn in 2005

"It may not be the way you want to hear the Goldbergs every time, but it was certainly an individual, compelling performance.”
ojgalli
165 posts
 
I did a quick check of different recording times and found most are between 60-70 minutes, although some were considerably longer or shorter. Gould's 1955 recording was under 40 minutes.

These timing variations are too great to be explained only by differences in tempi. Individual performers may take or skip the repetitions indicated in Bach's manuscript, add repetitions, or make other interpretive choices. Bach later made changes and corrections in a revised second edition of the variations, and also added an appendix of 14 canons. All these factors could affect the length.
t_bone
1,182 posts
 
There was a string trio version of it which was played quite slowly. It came out a few years ago on two discs and it was almost 90mins I think. I don't have a copy but have heard the first disc.
travis's avatar
travis
239 posts
 
My CD of the 1981 Gould recording states the length as 51' 14". So, you're saying that Dinnerstein's reading is 77' 20"?

Wake me when it's over and, I want some of what you're having.
Log in to respond
More to discover