Very nice, Luis. A few wrong (or perhaps muddied by the pedal) bass notes near the beginning (on both iterations), but probably not very noticeable.
I'd like to point out to Monica and others that this piece contains both "mezza voce" and "sotto voce" markings, and I think Luis handles them quite well. There was a discussion on the "Technique" board last year about the difference.
A few more notes:
-- nice misterioso
-- the second time before the repeat the D triad is lost
-- wonderful effects in the piu cantando and mezza voce
-- the sotto voce begins very well. In measure 9-10, and 11-12, have you ever tried playing the fourth beat into the first as detached quarter notes (and observe the rests in the LH by lifting the pedal). It provides a subtle "punch".
The composer indicates this a little by using the quarter notes instead of the dotted halves that we've seen in the previous 8 measures.
-- Everyone ritards at the molto crescendo that follows, even though it's not marked. Is this a tradition that I don't know about?
-- Nice rubato in the pp section before the final "lunga".
-- In the last "mezza voce/misterioso" section the quarter notes are not as detached as they were the first time, and I think detached is better (as well as being marked). Gives it a more "misterioso" feeling instead of just being soft.
-- The triplets into the duples at the end are not convincing. Maybe a little accent on the E-flat in the triplet would help?
Good recording. I've known this piece for 40 years which is why I got a little detailed.
Thanks for your detailed analysis (though I don't understand some of them... when you say measures 9-10, you're counting from the development section?).
I don't think there are any wrong notes. But there are 3 or 4 slips (hitting 2 keys instead of just one. =D ) which I left out.
About the ritard on the "crescendo"... I think you're talking about the E major chord in the development section, right before the recapitulation, is it?
If so, I don't believe this is a "tradition". I face this ritard as a rhetorical gesture to convince the listener of the E major chord which first appeared in the development section. I don't know exactly the function of this E major chord (I should think more... at first, it seems to be the Dominant of the Dominant of the Dominant !! but maybe I can find a better explanation for this chord... anyway, harmonically speaking, it's far from the Gm tonic, so, considering the musical discourse, there is good reason, in my opinion, to call the listener attention to it. That's the reason for the ritard, I think. Other performers may find different rhetorical gesture for this passage, but it seems that a ritard is pretty common, from what you said.
I consider two main things while interpreting: 1) style (which has to do with historical evidence) and 2) rhetoric, which is how to convince the listener of the musical abstract elements of the score (this one has to do with analysing the musical discourse).
Thanks again for the analysis.