The recording companies use all sorts of means by which 
          to recycle old performances from their vaults, the most common being 
          to invent a series such as, "great conductors/artists of the past", 
          "great historical recordings", and so on. It is easy to be 
          cynical about this and some of the stuff that is wheeled out in these 
          circumstances can be questionable. Here we have a disc in Deutsche Grammophon’s 
          "Legendary Recordings" series but I cannot imagine that anyone 
          would quibble at the application of the term "legendary" in 
          this case. 
        
 
        
DG have put on the one disc two complete, major Chopin 
          works. This is apt because Martha Argerich never got near to recording 
          the complete Chopin oeuvre: for example, there is no set of the 
          Mazurkas available to posterity. 
        
 
        
In this complete version of the Preludes, recorded 
          twenty seven years ago, the tigress of the keyboard laid down one of 
          her finest Chopin performances. 
        
 
        
Chopin conceived the preludes as a set (although they 
          are often played as stand-alones) and handled correctly they cumulatively 
          become a powerful single musical experience. All twenty-four keys are 
          used, each major key prelude being followed by its relative minor. The 
          composer cycles through them starting in C major and ends with the final 
          pair in the closely related keys of F major followed by its relative 
          (D minor). The most remote keys are reached in the middle and, generally, 
          these preludes tend to be more complex, reinforcing a feeling of moving 
          into remote territory before returning home. It is a principle inherent 
          in sonata form. 
        
 
        
I apologise if this is a bit technical for some, but 
          it helps to show the overall design, an aspect of the music that not 
          all pianists, including some great ones, seem to take into account. 
          A feature of the work is the contrast between preludes – an elegiac 
          number may be sandwiched between displays of virtuosity con fuoco, 
          and therein lurks a potential enemy of a grand design approach. 
          The group of nos. 16, 17 and 18 is a case in point. Pianists who are 
          seduced into overdoing the display side of 16 and 18 are in danger of 
          unbalancing the work. 
        
 
        
Argerich delivers no 16 in inimitable tigress fashion 
          with frightening panache and virtuosity, repeating the performance for 
          no. 18. That makes them fabulous on their own, but it is the sort of 
          thing that can militate against the overall flow of things. What is 
          the fate, for example, of the lyrical no. 16, mercilessly squashed between 
          this heavyweight display? Well, Argerich strengthens the lyricism with 
          a kind of masculinity (if I may use the term) that somehow enables it 
          to take the strain. By this and other means she achieves what ought 
          to be the impossible, a satisfying whole whilst not keeping on the lid 
          when a head of steam is building. 
        
 
        
She does several things which, in passing, caused my 
          eyebrows to raise. For example, the restraint of no. 4 in E minor is 
          over disturbed by a climax, the strength of which is surely not inherent 
          in the piece. The Raindrop Prelude (no.15), with its repeated 
          A flat throughout I have always considered gains power from an incessant, 
          steady approach but this is not Argerich’s way. These are, admittedly, 
          personal quibbles that are overridden by the overarching consistency 
          of approach that is inimitably Argerich. Some may wish the lyrical preludes 
          were more sweetly lyrical and the contemplative ones more deeply contemplative, 
          but the overall impact is such that for many this is the finest Chopin 
          prelude set ever recorded. One would expect tough competition from the 
          likes of Pollini and Kissin. Both, like Argerich, can make hair-raising 
          pianism sound easy, but Pollini sometimes gives an impression of being 
          emotionally switched off whilst Kissin charges thoughtlessly at the 
          music with a freneticism that cannot allow for the kind of cumulative 
          impact achieved by Argerich. 
        
 
        
Some of the music in the preludes sounds like a trial 
          run for the Second Sonata, for example the trio of nos. 16, 17 
          and 18 mentioned above. The Finale, in its shortness, 
          could easily serve as a prelude. Argerich’s rendering of it, an impossibly 
          smooth sounding combination of speed and virtuosity with restrained 
          dynamic, I find unrivalled. In the Funeral March third movement 
          she is, predictably, less successful. Hers is not a deep contemplation 
          on the mysteries of death. Nevertheless, like the Preludes, the 
          whole work has an overall power that is uniquely Argerich. 
        
 
        
A great Chopin disc. 
        
 
        
        
John Leeman