Perhaps the biggest challenge of the Hammerklavier is the sheer multiplicity of its challenges: stamina and agility, both physical and intellectual, extremes of extroversion and introversion, and, not least, labyrinthine counterpoint. It is in the last of these that Aimard excels. No doubt there are other recordings that are equally lucid in this respect, and it’s a long while since I attempted a full discographic overview (10/88), but I’m struggling to think of any that matches, still less surpasses the Frenchman in the first-movement development section or the mighty fugal finale.

As for the remaining desiderata, there is as much to query as there is to praise. Aimard is certainly highly sensitive to short-term structure. Every turning point in the first movement is acknowledged, and as the textures accumulate so he allows sufficient extra time for everything to register. His slowing for the G major second subject does ring a quiet bell of concern, however, and this turns to irritation when he does exactly the same in the repeat, and then to intense annoyance when he does it a third time in the recapitulation. Cumulatively such things detract from the broader momentum and flow, nullifying any broad dramatic vision he may have intended to convey.

At the other extreme – of philosophical contemplation rather than physical energy – the slow movement is spoilt by over-pedalling and lumpiness in the contours. It’s not easy to judge whether the piano, the acoustic or the pianist is most to blame for this but the overall impression is of a forced rhetoric rather than a truly Beethovenian con gran espressione.

The Eroica Variations, as pathbreaking in its time as the sonata, makes a fine choice of coupling, and Aimard is as alive to its abrupt moment-to-moment contrasts as to its general tone of intransigence. The finale brings another splendid demonstration of his fine ear for counterpoint. However, as with the sonata, I find the sound quality tending towards the glassy and brittle, and this time with some curious changes of acoustic along the way. It is disappointing that Aimard felt the need to play the
Covid card in his booklet aphorisms. By refreshing contrast the main essay, by Nigel Simeone, offers an informative potted reception history of both works.