Franz Schubert (1797-1828)
Piano Sonata in A minor, D537 (1817)
Piano Sonata in A major, D959 (1828)
Garrick Ohlsson (piano)
rec. 2021, St Silas the Martyr, Kentish Town, London, UK
Hyperion CDA68398 [65]

In the opening movement of D537 Ohlsson makes the first theme hospitable. Its repeated phrases then grow benignly but with exhilarating overall effect, a good harbinger for the second theme’s two balmy rising motifs (tr. 1, 0:47), then the following spurring rising motifs the basis of further exhilaration. Ohlsson brings to the exposition codetta an essential warmth, but the diminuendo for its two falling motifs is rightly a bit spooky because these begin the development in pounding discord (3:55). But it is not unassailable; it is lusciously becalmed and succeeded by recapitulation of the opening theme in D minor, fresher in upper register. The brief coda, properly back in A minor, magnificently epitomises the movement’s hopes and qualms.

I compare this with Paul Lewis recorded in 2022 (Harmonia Mundi HMM 902690). Where Ohlsson’s timing is 10:34, Lewis’ equivalent is 12:01, which brings a more imposing, formal deliberation while Ohlsson has more spontaneity. Lewis’ repetitions are edgier, his second theme a cool respite, his codetta quite gloomy and development discords bitter, despite some light in his recap. I say ‘equivalent’ because Lewis’ actual timing is 8:32 as he omits the second half repeat so his presentation lacks the balance Schubert expected.

The E major second movement has an opening theme a character on cloud nine, Ohlsson pleasantly flowing, untroubled at comfortable pace. A second character’s theme (tr. 2, 0:58) is more ruminative, careful in statement, yet also appreciates gentle descents. This theme is developed (3:30) in more clouded, urgent manner and threatens more tension until rescued by the return of the opening theme and a coda of lovely union of the two characters. Ohlsson keeps everything on an even keel so the outcome seems inevitable. Lewis’ first theme is jauntier, his second more intensely argued but the descents not loved. Lewis’ development concentrates on clarity of statement, leaving tension to the transition to the coda which is then presented with a more silver-like gloss.

Ohlsson treats the Allegro vivace finale as tongue-in-cheek romp. The imposing brief, loud fanfare in A minor has a soft, conciliating response, which in its repeat turns to the major and soon transforms, expanded, into a happy theme (tr. 3, 0:51) with sinewy sforzando-led backup. A kind of development in E major (2:32) is just more spice for Ohlsson to relish, luxuriantly gliding through the profuse repetition. Lewis, timing at 4:39 against Ohlsson’s 4:55, is a bit more Vivace, more alarming in opening phrase but throwing off the responding phrase. He brings more coyness to the happy version of the latter, more fizz to the sforzandos, but I prefer Ohlsson’s greater charm in the quieter moments and repetition.

Eleven years on, D959 is a more intensely contrasted sonata, but in the opening movement Ohlsson gives the first theme ‘fanfare’ statement a smidgen of warmth and roundedness, suiting its quick evaporation into smooth, descending arpeggios before they grow more insistent and spikier. Stability is restored with a decrescendo and the quavers’ delicacy which ushers in a lovely Shangri-la second and main theme (tr. 4, 1:35), treated on all appearances with wonderful calm and poise by Ohlsson. The development (7:46) showcases a subsidiary theme derived from the second to a grinding left-hand accompaniment, but it’s Ohlsson’s pearly tone in the soft playing of the main theme you remember. The development’s return he now makes tauter to its climax before the coda’s surprise of the first theme pp.

Again, I compare this with Lewis, his D959 recorded in 2002 (Harmonia Mundi HMC902165/66). It is excellent throughout, but I feel every note and gesture has been preconceived, so conveys less spontaneity than with Ohlsson. Lewis’ fanfare and arpeggios seem comparatively understated, the quavers’ delicacy less pointed. His main theme has telling poise and reflection but Ohlsson’s has more beauty. Lewis saves a grander treatment of the fanfare for its recapitulation and a special gentleness for that of the main theme, but Ohlsson’s pp first theme is more magical. For me, Lewis is disadvantaged by not repeating the exposition.

The slow movement is a lament yet its Andantino marking and the regular accompaniment lilt to the sole melody also suggest a lullaby. The melody is presented four times with growing elaboration of ornamentation and right-hand chords. Ohlsson’s initial dolefulness thereby becomes pricklier, sporadic fps sudden cries of pain. The central section (tr. 5, 2:55) releases semiquavers to demisemiquavers, the piano’s registers thunder and lightning at both extremes, yet most crushing in this brainstorm are the brutal fzs punctuating six-semiquaver motifs from 4:35. The melody doesn’t return until 5:53, Ohlsson’s in starker state with more luminous focus in its upper register. The coda (7:22), all in bass register, mixes warmth and murk.

In this movement Lewis has more searing impact. At a tempo more Andante than Andantino, it has, you feel, a tragic procession, not lullaby, with the fzs more shocking – yet Lewis brings quicker relief through more focus to the original melody on its return.

The third movement is largely conventional Scherzo and Trio, beginning with a sequence of soft, delightful arpeggios. Ohlsson treats these as a mischievous return to normality. Lewis goes for a lighter texture with just a hint of waspishness in the ff descending semiquavers in the Scherzo. Ohlsson’s ff (tr. 6, 0:53) is bracing but not shocking because of the overall ambience.

Ohlsson’s Allegretto Rondo finale is flowing and thankful, its sole episode (tr. 7, 2:00) the simplest of tunes unquenchably positive. The rondo’s second appearance develops grim recollections in the left hand (4:52) which get Ohlsson’s robust response and ultimately achieves elation in a successful fightback followed by the gentle, maternal version he cherishes. Lewis, timing at 13:06 against Ohlsson’s 12:09, reveals more distinctly the varieties of mood. There’s more energy in his right-hand accompaniment, still lightly articulated, to the first repeat of the rondo theme in the left and the episode theme has a touch more thrust, a more substantial rallying call. Lewis has more urgency facing the grim recollections and is more ecstatic in their successful banishment. Lewis is more anxious but exciting, Ohlsson more confident and mellow.

Michael Greenhalgh

Previous review: Ralph Moore (March 2023)

Help us financially by purchasing from