the unstoppable sviatoslav richter

[George]

Not to mention there's not one shred of historical data - and nothing even anecdotal!! - to suggest a pattern of eastern leanings in Richter's attitude. Nowhere is such a notion touched on, in the literature nor from the interviews I've read of Richter himself (Gramophone and The Enigma).

Perhaps someone who owns The Enigma could report on this, but I seem to recall him stating clearly that he preferred recordings from Prague. Whether that was in general, or only for a specific work or two, I cannot recall.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Well, if you can't hear the difference between his different recordings of the same piece, then the conversation ends there.

LOL!!

Of course, I didn't say that. If it's your aim to put words in my mouth then, indeed, the conversation ends here.

Then again, you said that you preferred the wilder one above. I don't really know what you're trying to say. You do or don't hear differences?

? 

It's pretty self-explanatory what I said above.

Hearing differences between performances is not the issue here. Hearing EASTERN performances as SUPERIOR is.

In any case, hear it or not, each Richter performance is different, and nearly all the wilder ones come from the eastern bloc.

All it really boils down to, Sid, is you have a well-know and well-ingrained fascination with many things eastern.

That's all good and well.

But to map your bias (perhaps too strong a word) onto Richter is simply silly. Nothing could be further from the truth. You, alone, make the claims you do. And it's eccentric to say the least. That's okay for you but simply isn't the truth of the matter. Your lone voice against all received wisdom may indeed appear provocative but you've done nothing to make a dent in that wisdom.

And I'm not one to snuggle up to conformity. But there's got to be something tangible to latch onto and it isn't in evidence here.

Sorry.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Perhaps someone who owns The Enigma could report on this, but I seem to recall him stating clearly that he preferred recordings from Prague. Whether that was in general, or only for a specific work or two, I cannot recall.

Most likely he was reporting on one specific work. That's what much of the book deals with.

In The Enigma Richter relates his feelings on many things. I've yet to notice an overall eastern sympathy.

[sidoze]

Perhaps someone who owns The Enigma could report on this, but I seem to recall him stating clearly that he preferred recordings from Prague. Whether that was in general, or only for a specific work or two, I cannot recall.

I've seen it but don't own a copy.

If it's your aim to put words in my mouth then, indeed, the conversation ends here.

It's not my aim. You just haven't yet given an indication that you know a lot of the more important recordings, or, more accurately, hear the difference between them.

Hearing differences between performances is not the issue here. Hearing EASTERN performances as SUPERIOR is.

Why don't you tell me what you hear then? Aside from the all-around musician thing, which is fairly common knowledge.

But to map your bias (perhaps too strong a word) onto Richter is simply silly. Nothing could be further from the truth. You, alone, make the claims you do. And it's eccentric to say the least. That's okay for you but simply isn't the truth of the matter. Your lone voice against all received wisdom may indeed appear provocative but you've done nothing to make a dent in that wisdom.

Alone? Trawl the RMCR archives, or you could try emailing Steve. If you took a bunch of well-worn Richter collectors and told them to grab their 10 favourite recordings, you can bet that three quarters or more will come from the eastern bloc, and probably all 10 will be live. It's not alone at all. You simply wish to paint it that way.

But there's got to be something tangible to latch onto and it isn't in evidence here.

I would suggest reading Richter's Conversations. Then it might be interesting mapping his movements over the years (not that any but the loneliest would do this). Then compare the recordings. And then maybe you could let me know what you prefer out of it all.

I've yet to notice an overall eastern sympathy.

Perhaps you might have noticed that Richter actually came from the east.

[George]

Most likely he was reporting on one specific work. That's what much of the book deals with.

In The Enigma Richter relates his feelings on many things. I've yet to notice an overall eastern sympathy.

Nor have I. I just wanted to point that out. In fact, I would be torn to choose between my US and Moscow performances of the Appassionata Sonata. 

BTW, I was actually referring to the film, I don't have the book. 

I had the pleasure of seeing the film once. I'd love to get it, Region 1's seem to be unavailable. 

[Drasko]

I do have The Enigma but don't feel like watching it right now. Going by the memory I believe he at least twice explicitly preferred his 'eastern' to his 'western' recording of the same piece:

- that Moscow Appassionata is better than New York
- and Tchaikovsky PC with Mravinsky (Ah, that was a conductor) to the Karajan (he did some unforgivable things)

there might be more but I cannot recall

[Dancing Divertimentian]

It's not my aim.

It's not? Then why are you doing it??

You just haven't yet given an indication that you know a lot of the more important recordings, or, more accurately, hear the difference between them.

Are you deliberately ignoring my previous posts?? Why must I continually go over the same territory with you?

Why don't you tell me what you hear then? Aside from the all-around musician thing, which is fairly common knowledge.

Are you deliberately ignoring my previous posts?? Why must I continually go over the same territory with you?

Alone? Trawl the RMCR archives, or you could try emailing Steve. If you took a bunch of well-worn Richter collectors and told them to grab their 10 favourite recordings, you can bet that three quarters or more will come from the eastern bloc, and probably all 10 will be live. It's not alone at all. You simply wish to paint it that way.

This is a very 'grasping at straws' response. Unbecoming of this board.

What you're speculating is untenable in the extreme. At worst it's pure fantasy.

What I'm talking about is hard facts. Documentation. The voluminous collection of literature devoted to Richter.

And the history of Richter as it's been documented in print paints a picture of Richter as a true artisan...one that transcends political boundaries.

Oh, and we all know the story of Richter's favorite recording of Brahms' 2nd PC, right? A western one w/ Maazel.

I would suggest reading Richter's Conversations. Then it might be interesting mapping his movements over the years (not that any but the loneliest would do this). Then compare the recordings. And then maybe you could let me know what you prefer out of it all.

Forget it.

Perhaps you might have noticed that Richter actually came from the east.

Say it again 'cause I just don't believe it!!!

[Dancing Divertimentian]

BTW, I was actually referring to the film, I don't have the book. 

Ah, cool.

I bet the film is a dandy!

[sidoze]

Are you deliberately ignoring my previous posts?? Why must I continually go over the same territory with you?

I must have missed it. Would you be so kind as to copy and paste what you said about Richter's different recordings and their differences depending on location?

What I'm talking about is hard facts. Documentation. The voluminous collection of literature devoted to Richter.

A certain reading-between-the-lines is sometimes required. I mean if you really need to hear an "expert" say it before you can think it for yourself, then you need only look at the Richter recordings that are held in mythical status--one simple example is the Sofia recital--and then consider where they were made. Your absolute dismissal of the very idea that Richter might have played better in the east is rather immature, frankly.

And the history of Richter as it's been documented in print paints a picture of Richter as a true artisan...one that transcends political boundaries.

Yes this is well-known, you already mentioned this using different words ("all-around musician").

Oh, and we all know the story of Richter's favorite recording of Brahms' 2nd PC, right? A western one w/ Maazel.

Well I never said that Richter shouldn't make up his own mind. However it's amusing that you point to one thing that Richter said while ignoring the other things.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I must have missed it. Would you be so kind as to copy and paste what you said about Richter's different recordings and their differences depending on location?

Incredible!!

On this thread so far I've referenced recordings from Aldeburgh and Tours, as well as Maazel's Brahms PC.

Set that against this:

Been there, done that, Sid. I'd been listening to eastern Richter recordings since before you were potty trained. From the likes of Parnassus, Praga, Melodiya, Russian Revelation, Music & Arts...not to mention a whole host of pirate recordings. So naturally I feel comfortable refuting your claim that the east is the best.

So, you puzzle me, Sid.

Besides, the list of questions I've posed to you that you've studiously ignored litters this thread and is completely disingenuous. In face of that you dare ask me for information...which I've already supplied.

How rich.

A certain reading-between-the-lines is sometimes required. I mean if you really need to hear an "expert" say it before you can think it for yourself, then you need only look at the Richter recordings that are held in mythical status--one simple example is the Sofia recital--and then consider where they were made.

If by "reading between the lines" you mean blindly picking out those things which conform to one's bias then no thank you. Which is, of course, exactly what you're doing right now.

Everybody knows that Sofia recording is legendary. Nothing about that fact proves in the least that "Richter is better in the east".

As for me, well, I try to keep an open mind when confronted with data. And when it comes to Richter I have no bias. Which is precisely my point! The closed mind is decidedly yours.

Your absolute dismissal of the very idea that Richter might have played better in the east is rather immature, frankly.

Again your blackened bias rears its ugly head. I've never claimed Richter couldn't be 'better' in the east. Point out where I have.

On any given day he could be superior on either side of the divide! And really, all we have to go on are recordings. Who's to say he might not have scorched it up in Paris one night - on the level of Sofia - that never made it to disc!!

So see how silly your propostion is?

Anyway, it's your blind insistence that Richter was SUPERIOR in the east that I take issue with. I'm simply trying to maintain balance in the appraisal of Richter while you insist things like "you must read between the lines" and such. So who's thinking is foggy, here?

Not mine.

Well I never said that Richter shouldn't make up his own mind. However it's amusing that you point to one thing that Richter said while ignoring the other things.

I haven't ignored anything. Once again in the face of the facts you sling innuendo in my face. If you check this thread you'd see I've covered all my bases and answered all your queries.

Which is a far cry from what you've done, Mr. Dodgy...

[sidoze]

Who's to say he might not have scorched it up in Paris one night - on the level of Sofia - that never made it to disc!!

So see how silly your propostion is?

If you've heard pirate recordings like you claim to have, then you would be less inclined to write such things.

Anyway this is pointless. We can start the conversation again if you wish to discuss recordings in specifics instead of just sweeping through the names of a bunch of labels and referencing two festivals. All of that is meaningless. Otherwise I'll leave you to be the voice of "balance"

[Dancing Divertimentian]

If you've heard pirate recordings like you claim to have, then you would be less inclined to write such things.

Huh?

I have no idea what you're accusing me of, Sid.

If it's your intention to call me a liar then you've just lowered yourself to an all-time low. This is decidedly loser territory.

If you meant otherwise, please specify...

Anyway this is pointless. We can start the conversation again if you wish to discuss recordings in specifics instead of just sweeping through the names of a bunch of labels and referencing two festivals. All of that is meaningless. Otherwise I'll leave you to be the voice of "balance"

Sigh....

Rattling off a laundry list of eastern recordings I've either owned or heard first-hand would be tedious to say the least.

But since you seem to be the impatient type - and one to throw around accusations about my sincerity/character - here's a generalized list of recordings from the east I've either owned/own/heard first-hand:

RUSSIAN REVELATION

• Schumann recital
• Liszt recital
• Prokofiev PS recital

DG

• Schumann recital

RUSSIAN DISC

• Beethoven PC's 1 & 3 w/ Kondrashin

MUSIC & ARTS

• Beethoven/Leipzig

MELODIYA

• The Russian Piano School edition, which includes a recording or two from the 40's!
• A few from the BMG/Melodiya box

COLUMBIA/MELODIYA

• Schubert/Chopin recital

SUPRAPHON

• Shostakovich/Schumann recital disc
• Prokofiev first PC w/ Ancerl

DOREMI

• I've lost track

ICONE

• Beethoven recital

LENNINGRAD MASTERS

• Mozart PC's
• Beethoven PS's
• Prokofiev/Galzunov recital

MEMORIES

• Schubert D.958

MEZHDUNARODNAYA KNIGA

• Haydn PS (w/ Shostakovich/Brahms chamber works)

MONITOR

• Misc. Schubert

MULTISONIC

• Mozart PS's

PARNASSUS

• at least two of the volumes

PRAGA

• Maybe two-thirds of the Richter edition. I'm down to five discs now.

And others I've no doubt forgotten.

I've omitted city names but obviously these are all eastern bloc dates.

And for good measure, western recordings (I offer only label names):

• Historical Performers
• Decca/Philips/DG/EMI
• RCA
• Monitor (again)
• Intaglio
• Ermitage
• Live Classics
• Stradivarius
• Vox
• Orfeo
• Olympia
• Teldec
• Music & Arts
• Vanguard

It goes without saying culls have whittled down my collection bit but I like to think the cream is still represented.

So now let's get down to business...

Let's talk about the difference between the 1966 Locarno Prokofiev 6th PS and the 1956 Prague 6th, shall we? Oh, wait, have you heard them? I better try something else...

Let's see, we've both heard the Praga Liszt/Ravel disc, right? Okay, let's compare the Praga Ravel to the RCA Newark, New Jersey Ravel, shall we. Oh, wait, have you heard the RCA?

Okay, let's try another one: how about the 1967 Vox Spoleto Debussy book 2 preludes to...whatever eastern Debussy there might be. Oh, wait...

Ah, how about some Schumann? Let's discuss the DG Prague recording to whatever western recording you wish. Oh, wait...

How about any Tours recordings? Heard any of those? Any of the Italian Chopin recordings? Any Italian or German Schubert recordings? How about the Paris Shostakovich Preludes vs. the Prague ones? Or maybe the Polish Prokofiev 5th PC vs. the London one? Or the Budapest Liszt 2nd PC vs. the London one? The Moscow (1948) Bach vs. the Italian?

Are we at an impasse?

The point of all this is not to be smug but to point out to you that my comparison listening betwen east & west is substantial. VERY substantial!!!

So whatever theories you may have about my character, it's clear I'm no liar. And like I said, I've been listening to east/west/north/south Richter before you were even potty trained!

[sidoze]

Huh?

I have no idea what you're accusing me of, Sid.

If it's your intention to call me a liar then you've just lowered yourself to an all-time low. This is decidedly loser territory.

If you meant otherwise, please specify...

Why so touchy? I meant that if you knew about the large number of pirate recordings made in the west, you'd realise that your comment "Who's to say he might not have scorched it up in Paris one night - on the level of Sofia - that never made it to disc!!" is wholly disingenuous.

I'm not disputing the amount of time you've listened to commercial recordings.

Rattling off a laundry list of eastern recordings I've either owned or heard first-hand would be tedious to say the least.

I didn't ask for that 

Let's talk about the difference between the 1966 Locarno Prokofiev 6th PS and the 1956 Prague 6th, shall we? Oh, wait, have you heard them? I better try something else...

The way you answer your own questions with "oh wait...." and so on makes me think you're just a little too cocky. Either that or you just want a response. So....the Philips '66 is a great performance by any standard, but it doesn't compare to the frightening intensity of Budapest 1963 on Doremi.

Aside from the Debussy Preludes, I've heard the other recordings.

How about any Tours recordings?

Few if any. 

Any of the Italian Chopin recordings?

Of course. Generally I don't think his Chopin is idiomatic enough for comparison with the great Chopin pianists.. The best recordings for me come form Bucharest, Prague and Moscow. There are a few wonderful performances of the etudes from western bootlegs in the '80s though.

Any Italian or German Schubert recordings?

Don't forget the Aldeburgh ones. Those are wonderful. But I would still opt for Schubert from Budapest, Moscow, Prague and Sofia.

How about the Paris Shostakovich Preludes vs. the Prague ones?

He recorded some of these in several places including Moscow, Warsaw and Vienna. You can guess which ones I'd choose, though I think with these pieces there is less to choose between the recordings.

Or maybe the Polish Prokofiev 5th PC vs. the London one?

Second (or third) and Fifth best of his five PC 5 recordings.

Or the Budapest Liszt 2nd PC vs. the London one? The Moscow (1948) Bach vs. the Italian?

I don't know the 2nd PC in Budapest. I know the 1st with Ancerl, and would not choose Richter for these pieces anyway. For Bach, see below please.

The point of all this is not to be smug but to point out to you that my comparison listening betwen east & west is substantial. VERY substantial!!!

In western recordings, but you don't demonstrate the same knowledge of eastern ones (aside from the Praga edition). I'd guess that you haven't heard the Moscow Prokofiev PC 5 from 1958, the Moscow Prokofiev Sonata 8 from 1974, Budapest Prokofiev 6 from 1963, Moscow and Kiev Visions fugitives, Warsaw Scriabin Preludes and Sonatas, Moscow Scriabin Sonata 6 (I would guess you know the 5th sonata from Prague), the Moscow Liszt TEs (8 of them) from 1956, Moscow Schumann Humoreske, Moscow Bach (not the very few '48 recordings you mentioned), perhaps the Moscow Rachmaninoff Preludes, the Ravel recordings made in Moscow, and I'm sure a fair amount of Beethoven and Brahms which I don't listen to.

Then there's the easily available Brilliant box of Beethoven, Schubert and Liszt, played in Moscow. Perhaps not on a level with some of the recordings just mentioned, but good enough to favourably compare to anything made in the west.

Anyway, this isn't going anywhere. We'd actually need to sit in the same room and listen to the same recording at the same time to actually enjoy doing this. But at least we're on recordings now. Or, to use your words, "something tangible to latch onto"

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Why so touchy? I meant that if you knew about the large number of pirate recordings made in the west, you'd realise that your comment "Who's to say he might not have scorched it up in Paris one night - on the level of Sofia - that never made it to disc!!" is wholly disingenuous.

Disingenuous?

No.

No matter how many live pirate recordings are floating around out there they still only cover a small fraction of Richter's performances. So how you'd come to the conclusion it's disingenuous of me to say this is beyond me.

Besides - and this is a BIG besides - the number of western pirate recordings I've heard is proportionally the same to the number of eastern pirates I've heard. Unfortunately I neglected to make that clear when I compiled that 'east & west' list of mine. The mistake I made was not including in my 'western' list those labels from the 'eastern' list that contain recordings from both east and west. 

You see, several of the labels on my 'eastern' list SWING BOTH WAYS!!

That you don't know this gives me pause...

I'm not disputing the amount of time you've listened to commercial recordings.

See above.

The way you answer your own questions with "oh wait...." and so on makes me think you're just a little too cocky.

Not cocky. Foolish, maybe, but you have to allow a person some fun sometimes! 

Don't forget the Aldeburgh ones. Those are wonderful.

Oh, I agree. Note my mention of Music & Arts on my western list. In fact, Aldeburgh dates make up a large portion of Music & Arts Richter releases. Hard to get around Aldeburgh on M & A. And I used to own a huge chunk of them.

But I would still opt for Schubert from Budapest, Moscow, Prague and Sofia.

Prague/Moscow? Now wait a minute. We're talking about two different pianists with Richter's Schubert here. In Prague in 1956 (even Sofia in 1958) Richter is much too severe to make much of Schubert's inherent grace and poetry. Simply too much propulsion which slights Schubert's carefully cultivated and meticulous soundworld (but still good, of course!).

Later Richter, say from the 60's on, is much more in tune with Schubert's unique properties. Just listen to the 1966 Aldeburgh D.575, or the 1979 Philips D.840, or, even, the 1972 Prague D.960 and you'll hear much greater allowances for requisite poetry and repose - AT NO LOSS OF POWER!! He just nails it right on the head by the 60's.

And as far as Moscow, some of Richter's 50's Schubert from there on both Melodiya and Monitor is cut from the same severe cloth. Just never got along with them, myself.

**And take note!! This is a perfect example of a pianist in transit - Richter coming to terms with a composer over a period of time. The geographic location of his concerts - east or west - mattered not a whit. See what I'm saying, Sid? That's my point!!

He recorded some of these [Shostakovich Preludes] in several places including Moscow, Warsaw and Vienna. You can guess which ones I'd choose, though I think with these pieces there is less to choose between the recordings.

Vienna? You mean the Decca recordings? Well, we can safely discount these recordings (and indeed the entire set!) as there is no more abysmal set of recordings sonics-wise than that Vienna Decca set. Of course, when it comes to Richter there's no shortage of pirate jobs with tenth-rate sound but this (official!) Vienna set takes the cake! Only the scarcity value of the repertoire allowed this set to ever see the light of day. But that still isn't enough to save it. Wasn't but a blip in the catalogue, either. Not hard to figure out why.

However, we do get the Shostakovich goods in both Paris (Philips) and Prague (Supraphon). I can only scratch my head if you can make the claim to prefer one over the other. Neither one has a leg up. They are perfectly complementary.

I don't know the 2nd [Liszt] PC in Budapest. I know the 1st with Ancerl, and would not choose Richter for these pieces anyway.

Ah, too bad you don't know the Budapest. You needn't look any further to find the one true exemplar of parallel Richter than here.

It's a perfect laboratory test case: the Budapest and the London Liszt 2nd PC are from the exact same year a mere two months apart (July & Sept. 1961). They're twins.

Setting aside the fact that the Budapest is live, its studio London counterpart suffers not a whit in comparison. The music-making on both couldn't be more sparkling. Richter's musical magnetism is without peer and to claim he's 'better' in the eastern reading is to make hash of sound reasoning (not that you directly said that in this case).

BTW, haven't a clue why you wouldn't rate Richter, here.

In western recordings, but you don't demonstrate the same knowledge of eastern ones (aside from the Praga edition).

Hardly, Sid. Honestly, I don't know what you're looking at sometimes on this thread but I spelled it out for you in plain english in my last post.

I'd guess that you haven't heard the Moscow Prokofiev PC 5 from 1958, the Moscow Prokofiev Sonata 8 from 1974, Budapest Prokofiev 6 from 1963, Moscow and Kiev Visions fugitives, Warsaw Scriabin Preludes and Sonatas, Moscow Scriabin Sonata 6 (I would guess you know the 5th sonata from Prague), the Moscow Liszt TEs (8 of them) from 1956, Moscow Schumann Humoreske, Moscow Bach (not the very few '48 recordings you mentioned), perhaps the Moscow Rachmaninoff Preludes, the Ravel recordings made in Moscow, and I'm sure a fair amount of Beethoven and Brahms which I don't listen to.

Well, you just prove my point, here.

Sure your list is a good one but so is the list I posted previously of recordings that you, yourself, haven't heard. So you see it swings both ways. Naturally neither of us is going to tread the EXACT same territory recording-wise but that's not the same thing as claiming I'm lacking in my eastern experience.

That's just bogus.

Anyway, this isn't going anywhere. We'd actually need to sit in the same room and listen to the same recording at the same time to actually enjoy doing this. But at least we're on recordings now. Or, to use your words, "something tangible to latch onto"

That's the first 'tangible' thing you've said on this entire thread!!!!!!

[Holden]

The fluffs mentioned in the Hammerklavier came from the Prague recording, not the London.

One thing that came out very clearly in the Enigma was that Richter was invariably dissatisfied with his own performances, no matter where they were. The one thing you have to credit him with was his consistency - until his "Later Years". As far as I'm concerned the East/West argument is specious. As has been mentioned his Aldeburgh appearances produced some magical stuff and I believe that there is still a Schubert D894 hiding in the archives awaiting release.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

As far as I'm concerned the East/West argument is specious.

Indeed.

[sidoze]

So how you'd come to the conclusion it's disingenuous of me to say this is beyond me.

There are recordings covering many months of most years from the '60s onward. It was an easy conclusion to come to.

Besides - and this is a BIG besides - the number of western pirate recordings I've heard is proportionally the same to the number of eastern pirates I've heard. Unfortunately I neglected to make that clear when I compiled that 'east & west' list of mine. The mistake I made was not including in my 'western' list those labels from the 'eastern' list that contain recordings from both east and west. 

You see, several of the labels on my 'eastern' list SWING BOTH WAYS!!

I'm slightly confused by the last sentence. Pirates and labels, in my terminology, don't go together. A pirate recording is precisely that -- one that is not on CD (or cannot be on CD, if it's made by an audience member). When you include this sort of recording in listening to Richter, you'll realise why I said disingenuous above. The western pirates far, far exceed the eastern ones.

Prague/Moscow? Now wait a minute. We're talking about two different pianists with Richter's Schubert here......Later Richter, say from the 60's on, is much more in tune with Schubert's unique properties.

Yes I'd agree with that, two different ones. I much prefer the earlier, more overtly virtuosic style. The softer side of Schubert isn't for me yet.

But to say that later Richter is more in tune with Schubert's unique poroperties is to do the same thing you accused me of: having a special knowledge that doesn't exist. Earlier Richter (and I would include the great '60s recordings) captured Schubert's unique properties just fine, even if it's perhaps less Viennese. After all, I think it was Gould who said that Richter made him understand (or feel, or appreciate) Schubert (or Schubert's D960) for the first time, and that was on a trip to Russia long ago.

**And take note!! This is a perfect example of a pianist in transit - Richter coming to terms with a composer over a period of time. The geographic location of his concerts - east or west - mattered not a whit. See what I'm saying, Sid? That's my point!!

Surely. But I think this is a different matter. I'm not going to take a 1980 performance in the west and compare it to one from 1959 in Moscow. Even witout taking into account any restrictions of age, we'd be listening to a person with a changed mentality. When I said Richter sounds more comfortable in the east, I meant to focus on recordings within 5 - 10 years of each other (and usually much less than that).

Vienna? You mean the Decca recordings? Well, we can safely discount these recordings

Yes, agreed

It's a perfect laboratory test case: the Budapest and the London Liszt 2nd PC are from the exact same year a mere two months apart (July & Sept. 1961). They're twins.

Setting aside the fact that the Budapest is live, its studio London counterpart suffers not a whit in comparison. The music-making on both couldn't be more sparkling. Richter's musical magnetism is without peer and to claim he's 'better' in the eastern reading is to make hash of sound reasoning (not that you directly said that in this case).

I don't think I can overstate what a major difference in approach we have here. For me even Richter recordings coming 1 day apart are not twins. They can be very different, enough so to easily favour one over the other. And when you throw in an orchestra and conductor, well, of course the recordings will be dissimilar. To repeat myself--as you've said time and again: there's no question about Richter the all-around musician (sparkling, magnetic, without peer, all that). But Monday's performance will sound different from Tuesday's. Critical listening and personal taste will obviously lead you to prefer one to another. Do you have a preference between these two almost certainly different performances (disregarding the issue of sound quality)?

I hope you don't get the impression that I look for the recording location and then make my preference based on that. Sometimes I think you believe just that. I concluded all this after far too many hours of listening to Richter CDs and pirate recordings. It's not an indisputable conclusion, obviously, but it is a genuine one, reached by a number of people even if not printed in any published literature.

BTW, haven't a clue why you wouldn't rate Richter, here.

I wouldn't say that. I'd just prefer one or two pianists here, and I never liked the works enough to consider multiple recordings.

Sure your list is a good one

I don't think you know quite how good witout having heard them.

but so is the list I posted previously of recordings that you, yourself, haven't heard.

Which ones would those be? The Tours, Debussy Preludes bk 2, and Liszt PC 2. Anything else I missed?

I'm sure those recordings are wonderful--after all I've heard his Debussy on BBC Legends and his PC 2s with Kondrashin. So it's not quite the same thing as missing some of Richter's recordings at his virutoso peak.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

There are recordings covering many months of most years from the '60s onward. It was an easy conclusion to come to.

You're having me on, of course!!!!!

No one can claim to have heard every single Richter bootleg in existence!!! Western or whatnot!

By your reasoning one would need to have auditioned every single western bootleg for the span of thirty years in order to eliminate any chance of a superior western performance cropping up.

This, of course, doesn't even take into account the concerts of Richter's that WEREN'T bootlegged!!!

Okay, humor me:

I would be pleased if you could cite to the very last one every single western Richter bootleg in existence!

Also give examples of the oceans and oceans you've somehow been privy to audition!

And list the vast number that have fallen into the hands of Richter enthusiasts.

And list the vast number that have been authenticated (without doubt!) to have been from Richter.

And list the vast number that are in listenable enough condition to draw any sort of conclusion from.

And list the vast number that have made the rounds so that pianophiles can come to some sort of consensus.

And the vast number...etc...

How unbelievably silly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To put it simply, to base an argument on something like this is purely another one of your untenable/speculative concotions. A fantasy.

I'm slightly confused by the last sentence. Pirates and labels, in my terminology, don't go together. A pirate recording is precisely that -- one that is not on CD (or cannot be on CD, if it's made by an audience member). When you include this sort of recording in listening to Richter, you'll realise why I said disingenuous above. The western pirates far, far exceed the eastern ones.

Just where did you get the idea that bootleg/pirate recordings originating from the audience can't make it onto CD/LP?? Why, it's a thriving industry!!!!! Been so for ages!!

Bootlegging is practically the second oldest profession!!!!

Yes I'd agree with that, two different ones [pianists]. I much prefer the earlier, more overtly virtuosic style. The softer side of Schubert isn't for me yet. But to say that later Richter is more in tune with Schubert's unique poroperties is to do the same thing you accused me of: having a special knowledge that doesn't exist.

Nope. No double standard. Read on:

Earlier Richter (and I would include the great '60s recordings) captured Schubert's unique properties just fine, even if it's perhaps less Viennese.

Well, that's just it, of course!! Richter's style in Schubert audibly changed over time. The fact you noticed this is testament to that!

I might even make the argument that this change took place as a result of his increased exposure to the west. Is it coincidence that by the mid-60's Richter's Schubert was, indeed, tinged with a Viennese influence? And 1960 is, of course, the demarcation line for Richter's western exposure. So it seems only natural he should pick up on Viennese qualities in Schubert that might have been inaccessible to him while confined to the Soviet theatre.

I could be wrong but artists are only human. They're not immune to their surroundings.

After all, I think it was Gould who said that Richter made him understand (or feel, or appreciate) Schubert (or Schubert's D960) for the first time, and that was on a trip to Russia long ago.

LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!

How very nice of you to have taken a page straight from my own playbook, Sid!!!!

Though you really should cite sources as I don't take to plagiarism easily!!!

(Of course you altered the content a bit to fit your Russian bias. No surprise...)

Surely. But I think this is a different matter. I'm not going to take a 1980 performance in the west and compare it to one from 1959 in Moscow. Even witout taking into account any restrictions of age, we'd be listening to a person with a changed mentality. When I said Richter sounds more comfortable in the east, I meant to focus on recordings within 5 - 10 years of each other (and usually much less than that).

There's no reason in the world why one can't compare an artist in any stage of his/her career. The picture of a true artisan is slighted if you don't. Artists grow, learn, experience things, whatever. Humans (artists) don't live in a vacuum. Life events play an integral role in the development of any person. Wouldn't expect anything less from a patron of good 'ol Earth!

I don't think I can overstate what a major difference in approach we have here. For me even Richter recordings coming 1 day apart are not twins. They can be very different, enough so to easily favour one over the other. And when you throw in an orchestra and conductor, well, of course the recordings will be dissimilar. To repeat myself--as you've said time and again: there's no question about Richter the all-around musician (sparkling, magnetic, without peer, all that). But Monday's performance will sound different from Tuesday's. Critical listening and personal taste will obviously lead you to prefer one to another. Do you have a preference between these two almost certainly different performances (disregarding the issue of sound quality)?

You're expending a lot of energy on what is effectively a giant strawman.

My "twins" quip is simply a reference to the fact that neither of the two performances need suffer in comparison to one another (that is, since they're from competing sides of the divide).

Simply put: they are both of high quality! See? So in that regard they're "twins".

I did, of course, expound on what I meant. Though sadly you seem to have missed that (again).

In no way did I infer that they are note for note IDENTICAL performances.

I hope you don't get the impression that I look for the recording location and then make my preference based on that. Sometimes I think you believe just that. I concluded all this after far too many hours of listening to Richter CDs and pirate recordings. It's not an indisputable conclusion, obviously, but it is a genuine one, reached by a number of people even if not printed in any published literature.

Ditto, me. I just happen to believe that Richter had it going on wherever he went!

Which ones would those be? The Tours, Debussy Preludes bk 2, and Liszt PC 2. Anything else I missed?

This, of course, was not the point of my remarks on the subject. It could be any number of recordings from both of us. Do you understand?

Anyway, I give up.

I'm out of this discussion, Sid. I simply can't take all your strawmen, innuendo (innuendi?), misattributions, and fantasies any more.

And the fact you're stealing my own words concerning Richter proves conclusively you have little in the tank history-wise concerning Richter.

I expected more out of you but, well, I guess that's my problem...

[sidoze]

I'm out of this discussion, Sid. I simply can't take all your strawmen, innuendo (innuendi?), misattributions, and fantasies any more.

And the fact you're stealing my own words concerning Richter proves conclusively you have little in the tank history-wise concerning Richter.

I expected more out of you but, well, I guess that's my problem...

I never read that response. Get off the high horse and realise that you were only the copier of the text, not the writer or pianist or anything else. The fact that you even remember to cite it and seem itching to do so shows how petty you are.

Anyway this conversation should definitely end. I'm not going to put in the effort to answer your last post (though obviously I could, and this could go on for weeks). Learned some things though: I've realised that you don't know many of Richter's eastern recordings, don't know the difference between commercial and pirate releases, and that your taste here, and in several other areas I could cite, favours a smoother, more genial type of reading, and that immediately puts you in favour of Richter's later and usually western recordings. Nothing wrong with that of course. But to say I have fantasies, when your head is so far up your needle-thin ass, shows exactly who you are. From now on I'll make a point of avoiding your posts and I hope you do likewise with mine.