Parry Piano Trios 1 & 3

[Alan Howe]

...forthcoming (next year) from Hyperion:
http://www.clicmusique.com/parry-trios-pour-piano-trio-leonore-p-101341.html

[semloh]

I wonder why they are issuing this, when all of Parry's piano chamber music has received perfectly good recordings and performances on Meridian. And, much as I love it myself, we're not exactly talking about masterpieces.
http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2000/aug00/parrytrios.htm

[FBerwald]

Ahmm... what vitriolic assessment or dissection of Elgar. He doesn't seem to be much too impressed by Parry either!

[Gareth Vaughan]

The review was written by David Wright whose views are often eccentric to say the least. Try his essay on Schubert.

[khorovod]

What an extraordinary review... I am surprised the editors at MW allowed it through, or maybe it was edited down to this final state?

I'll be interested to hear these works when they come out next year. I've enjoyed a lot of what I've heard of Parry's music and the combination of artists and label promises surely this release will make an excellent case for the trios.

[Mark Thomas]

As an aside, and without agreeing at all with David Wright's characterisation of Elgar's music, judging by accounts I've read of Elgar the man, he's not wrong. Certainly his treatment of both Parry and Stanford was very shoddy. I do think too that Parry's chamber music is not the best of his output - there's often something dutiful and pedestrian about it which is quite lacking from his orchestral and choral works, for example.

[matesic]

re David Wright .... (comment self-suppressed on account of rising blood pressure)

[Gareth Vaughan]

For more by David Wright visit: www.wrightmusic.net
David Wright is a fine musician, but, as I said, somewhat eccentric in his views and not a little vitriolic sometimes.

[khorovod]

As an aside, and without agreeing at all with David Wright's characterisation of Elgar's music, judging by accounts I've read of Elgar the man, he's not wrong. Certainly his treatment of both Parry and Stanford was very shoddy. I do think too that Parry's chamber music is not the best of his output - there's often something dutiful and pedestrian about it which is quite lacking from his orchestral and choral works, for example.

Yes that maybe so but not sure what place it has in this review. i might have thought it was padding to make up the word count. That so often happens with (sometimes interesting but not strictly relevant) introductions of extra musical information into reviews. But looking at his website it seems more like he just saw an opportunity to shoehorn in some of his personal animus against Elgar. There's some deeply unpleasant writing on his webpage and some wildly inaccurate writing too, both in terms of biographical information about composers and also purely musical matters. He seems quite unhealthily obsessive and, yes, very often vitriolic as Gareth says. It dismays me that someone finding their way into classical music might stumble across his "essays" and leave with all sorts of wrong-headed info.

But back to the topic (apologies, that diversion was quite interesting and I couldn't resist investigating), I haven't heard the trios but maybe (hopefully!) this group will find something in Parry's works that other performers haven't. I'm quite excited about this release to be honest.

[FBerwald]

As a Parry enthusiast, I must say the recently released string quartet recording was a bit disappointing - imho it didn't captivate like his symphonic music but as he writes wonderfully for the piano, the Trios might be interesting (I haven't heard any of them yet).

[Alan Howe]

Let's now keep off the subject of David Wright and his writings. Thanks.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

Have not read Wright and am not going to. Have just listened again to Parry's Piano Trio Nos 1 and 2 to refresh my memory. I played No.1 several years ago and found it very fine. Upon rehearing of both, I must say, I find them both first rate. Why bandy about a word like masterpiece, it does not help in evaluating them.

Sometimes, I think the English are too quick to relegate the works of their countryman to the ranks of the garden apartment. I lived in England for many years, and as an Anglophile, I well know it is not in the English nature to brag, which, of course in any event, is not an attractive trait. But, speaking or rather writing, as an American, and a life long chamber music performer, I think those of you who consider Parry's piano trios second rate are off base.

From this period, 1875-1890, I feel, these trios should be placed in the front rank of such works. I would venture to say that if they had not been written by an Englishman but by an Austrian or German, that they would have gained a lot more traction in the repertoire. The melodies are fresh and appealing, their treatment shows a sure hand and the part-writing is excellent. Just for a moment, consider how many composers have trouble keeping the piano in check (q.v. Mendelssohn) so that it is an equal and not the leader of the trio or given a part which from time to time shows off the pianist's virtuosic technique. Parry succeeds where many others have failed.

Furthermore, from the standpoint of being able to hear the cello, these trios show a deft hand, which even Brahms in his piano trios often failed to accomplish, where one can hear the cello merely growling below the piano part and not its melody.

I would agree that the Meridian performances are excellent. But think about this, there are many fine recordings of, for example, the Brahms piano trios, yet more come out regularly, and why not, except for the fact that we could use more recordings by the unsungs. So, I say, with regard to Parry[s very good piano trios, let us have a few more recordings, they deserve them.

[eschiss1]

1st, good on Hyperion for releasing a new recording of the trios.

I see that one of the trios was performed recently in a concert celebrating the 100th anniversary of Parry's death. Still not enough exposure, but some. I believe I've heard one or more of the Meridian recordings, but they seem to be getting pricey and rarer. Hope Hyperion thinks about recording the 2nd trio too, maybe, or someone does... (and if Naxos does a competing cycle at some point, will I complain?)

[semloh]

I would agree that the Meridian performances are excellent. But think about this, there are many fine recordings of, for example, the Brahms piano trios, yet more come out regularly, and why not, except for the fact that we could use more recordings by the unsungs. So, I say, with regard to Parry[s very good piano trios, let us have a few more recordings, they deserve them.

Well, only because there are so many other unsung works that haven't made it to CD, including works by Parry, I always prefer the record companies to break new ground. But other than that - the more Parry the merrier! 

As to the word "masterpiece", I think you would agree that some pieces of music are more worthy of that description than others, and much as I love Parry I personally cannot regard them as masterpieces - either in classical music generally or in the context of Parry's total output.  Fine and enjoyable, yes, but - for me - not masterpieces.

[Santo Neuenwelt]

Another part of that post you quoted said
"Why bandy about a word like masterpiece, it does not help in evaluating them."