It has been my experience that it is impossible to not like Rameau. So, why don't we hear more of his glorious music? I think his Pièces de Clavecin en Concerts is a guaranteed pleaser: a perfect alternative to Bach's Brandenburg Concertos. This may be an unfortunate comparison, leading to confusion; I link them only in that they are ensemble pieces of the Baroque period that are full of energy and delight.
Rameau's collection of pieces is for harpsichord plus other instruments: there is a great deal of leeway as to what those other instruments are. Rameau provides suggestions in his preface how to adapt the music to various instruments. They aren't concertos, yet the harpsichord has a very prominent role throughout. Indeed, the harpsichord part is not for the amateur or faint of heart: it is dazzling and technically challenging. The only thing that could ruin this music, I think, is a harpsichordist not up to the challenge.
There are five concerts, each with three or four movements, each with fanciful a title, such as La Pantomime, or L'Indiscrète. A delightful new recording came into my possession by a group calling itself Baroque Nouveau: Charles Sherman as the harpsichordist, Anthony Martin on violin, Stephen Schultz on the baroque flue, and Josh Lee on the viola da gamba. While Charles Sherman isn't generally recognized as a "big name" harpsichordist, he has been active in the American early music scene and is well known and respected as a continuo and ensemble player. He obviously came well prepared to the recording studio and demonstrates exactly the sparkle these pieces demand, along with a sensitivity to his fellow collaborators: this is a true ensemble performance.
The recorded sound is excellent. This is a studio recording, the sound is neither dry nor too live. Barry Brenesal complains in his Fanfare review about the prominence of the harpsichord in the balance. Excuse me? This is music for which the harpsichord part can be played solo, and ultimately it is the harpsichord that carries the music! He goes on to recommend against the recording because he happens to like the (much) earlier recording by the Trio Sonnerie. I am a regular subscriber to Fanfare, and value it, but I find many of the reviewers to be hopelessly addicted to the recordings they are already familiar with. Indeed, I find most of the Fanfare reviewers to be naive about – if not prejudiced against – "early music" and Historically Informed Practice. Fanfare Magazine really is a resource for music of the 19th and early 20th centuries, with a frequent proclivity for performers and ensembles of prior generations: conservative and downright reactionary; I am often appalled at how many of their reviews are for reissued recordings.
I also have Blandine Rannou's recording of these pieces. It provides subtle differences in tempos and interpretation and a sound that is perhaps slightly less clear – the harpsichord is just as prominent! I'd be unwilling to claim one was "better" than the other. Both are faithful to the music, which is full of delights.
