]I have loved Joshua Rifkin's [[ASIN:B000005IYF Scott Joplin: Piano Rags]interpretations of Joplin's Rags for (to date myself) decades, and love his interpretations. But it's just one one album. And I loved Joplin. And I saw this: all his piano music, price more than reasonable. And asked myself: How bad can it be?
Answer: not bad. In fact excellent. I don't like a very, very few of Arpin's readings: Maple Leaf Rag, as some people have already reported, is done for speed. It was typical of the time, and I think Arpin did it as an exhibit of what people often heard. But Maple Leaf is an isolated example. For the most part, the tempos are leisurely, with beautifully orchestrated mini-hesitations and accelerations. Magnetic Rag is a test piece: it's one of the best pieces of music ever written by an American, and Arpin has it totally. Likewise Solace. Hesitater, go for it: you'll be glad you did. You may not like 100 percent, but you'll be very happy anyway.

The musical renditions on this CD will transport you back to another, simpler time and place. I enjoyed listening to this very much.

We love this collection and it came at such a reasonable price. Our ten month old also seems to enjoy it, especially "Maple Leaf Rag".

Complete Piano Music of Scott Joplin
This CD collection of Scott Joplin's piano music is a treasure. I am a lifetime afficionado of Scott Joplin music, and this is the most enjoyable rendering of his piano works that I have found. John Arpin is superb in his performance. It seems obvious to me that he also treasures Joplin's compositions, because he plays them with great fun and expressiveness, and because he is true to and respectful of the original works. The occasional embellishments added by the performer are tasteful and completely in keeping with the originals. Listening to this collection over and over has inspired me to learn to play all the music it contains. Anyone thinking these pieces are redundant or very similar to all the others, has not listened to them enough. Perhaps this is a genre certain critics don't really appreciate. I admit, I initially had difficulty learning which song was which when listening, but as I learned each better I have come to discern the subtle and distinctive personalities of each. I was reminded by one critic's remarks of the line in "Amadeus" when the Emperor told the composer Mozart that his piece simply had "too many notes." I think each of Joplin's compositions adds something unique to the body of his works.

As a fan of ragtime since high school (I'm 53 now) I have to say that Arpin really understands Joplin better than most; he gives his interpretations that little extra "oomph" that ragtime needs. Unlike the classical types, Rifkin foremost among them, he realizes that ragtime was originally dance and dance hall music, and plays it with a consistent tempo and strong rhythmic conviction, which is something most pianists don't do. However, as a composer myself, I have to say I am sometimes dismayed by the liberties he takes with the actual notes that Joplin himself wrote! Playing a passage an octave lower or an octave higher than it was originally written may not seem like much, but it changes the whole character of the music. And that's not the least of Arpin's transgressions; if you look at the original sheet music you'll see just how much he changed in his "interpretation". Sure, you can go back to the original piano roll versions, but, given a choice, do you really want to listen to a machine? Great for historical purposes maybe, but . . .
SO here's my question; is this the price we have to pay to get a decent
version of Scott Joplin's rags? Maybe so.