eld in the studio, hence complimenting on the same inevitable Michelangeliness with which earlier sparked an inexplicable dread and sentimentality, ethos and pathos, classical and romantic.
             A theme associated with No. 13 and 15 is that of structure and here one can follow one thematic line after another. Largely the No. 13 evolves into 1990 Hamburg (Deutsche Grammophon 431 097-2), from Rome 15 December 1951. It is hard not too notice the variation in terms of style from Rome 15 December 1951, to Naples 29 November 1953, and to Brecia 25 May 1968, culminating in the Hamburg 1990. In sequence, each performance has distinct subjects, in the uniform standard. Rome undergoes tight security of control over emotion. Here the portrait of heaven has a different meaning. Rather than constructing it inside out, an emotional loop runs the course fully aware of its presence outside. It is extremely difficult to do this, or very easy to do, depending on circumstances of how one has the full grasp, before translating a thought into a sound. In the case with Michelangeli, not only there is preserved the thoughts but a perfect translation of that thought, renders the entire discourse. Technical resources amazingly total, yet so complex not a hint of its complexity has anywhere been suggested. What is more enriching is its ability to render and shape consensus, of music, nothing else. Especially Rome, there is more evidence here so as in suggesting one's acquisition, formed in correspondence with a reasonable assessment and set of, not nominal, but complete understanding of its value. Naples an exercise of assiduity and close attendance: a studio performance here can be seen as material that fully materialized before a note being juxtaposed. It flatly outlines the every element, siting more the reason than erudition or technical wizardry.* Brescia an endless surprises over an inherent talent in the pianist: Michelangeli really runs away with this perf...