Poll
Question:
Pick one!
Option 1: Schnabel
votes: 1
Option 2: Kempff
votes: 12
Option 3: Richter
votes: 20
Option 4: Cortot
votes: 3
Option 5: Michelangeli
votes: 9
Your personal preference?
Gah.
Well, I do like Schnabel. As well as Kempff. And Richter. Cortot, maybe not so much. And I really haven't heard much Michelangeli, to tell the truth.
I guess in this situation, I pick Kempff, because currently his recordings mean more to me than the others.
From that period of time, there are 3 pianists for me:
Richter
Kempff
Serkin
Of course there are others, but these 3 are my personal tops :)
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Schubert D 780 - Mitsuko Uchida - Schubert Moment Musicaux #6 in Ab for Piano D 780
In ascending order.
Quote from: Drasko on June 28, 2008, 07:15:11 AM
In ascending order.
Oh, you mean Serkin, Kempff Richter? Yes, I could live with that too. I was going for "no particular order".
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 28, 2008, 07:25:32 AM
Oh, you mean Serkin, Kempff Richter? Yes, I could live with that too. I was going for "no particular order".
No, I was considering OP's list, not yours.
Quote from: mn dave on June 28, 2008, 07:16:24 AM
???
???
Quote from: Drasko on June 28, 2008, 10:49:27 AM
No, I was considering OP's list, not yours.
???
In which direction are you ascending?
Quote from: Drasko on June 28, 2008, 07:15:11 AM
In ascending order.
me too, though I'd switch Richter/Cortot
Quote from: mn dave on June 28, 2008, 10:56:20 AM
In which direction are you ascending?
bottom to top
not sure why these 5 were mentioned...
Quote from: ezodisy on June 28, 2008, 11:03:28 AM
bottom to top
Well, that's okay then. :)
[...if you mean Schnabel is at the top]
Those are five superb pianists, but I'd have to go with Cortot.
Depends on the repertoire, dudnit?
Of course, but I thought you had an overall favourite.
I wanted to choose some influential pianists which differ a lot.
An overall favorite? Well, in that case...Rubinstein!
For variety of repertoire alone, Richter has the rest beaten hands down. Technically, he is also in front though Michelangeli might come close. Musically, they were all different people but I enjoy just about everthing Richter does and I can't say that for the others.
Also, why no Gilels or Rubinstein?
The answer depends upon the repertoire, e.g.:
For Beethoven Kempff
For Bartok Sandor
For Bach None
Quote from: Holden on June 28, 2008, 02:59:23 PM
Also, why no Gilels or Rubinstein?
Or Edwin Fischer, or Solomon.
Q
In more-or-less chronological order:
Rudolf Serkin
Martha Argerich
Murray Perahia
These are probalby my overall favorites; every recording I've heard from each of them is utterly masterful. And they're very different in what they play and how they play it. Serkin is the consummate player for the Austro-German repertoire, especially Beethoven and Mendelssohn; Argerich is great at the Russian Romantic and (I believe) contemporary music, while Perahia is the quintessential classicist whose Mozart and Brahms are beyond reproach.
However, there are others who win my vote in a more limited sense:
Artur Rubinstein in Chopin
Vladimir Horowitz in D. Scarlatti's sonatas
Alicia de Larrocha (of course!) in Spanish piano music
Jean-Yves Thibaudet in French music, especially Ravel and Messiaen
Maurizio Pollini in Stravinsky and Bartók (and probably other contemporary composers; but I don't like his Chopin or what I've heard of his Beethoven)
Stephen Hough deserves honorable mention for his devotion to obscure virtuoso Romantic concerti; he makes a compelling case for music that's no longer in fashion and that I probably wouldn't care for if anyone else played them. :)
Quote from: premont on June 28, 2008, 05:03:07 PM
The answer depends upon the repertoire, e.g.:
For Beethoven Kempff
For Bartok Sandor
For Bach None
I'd take Gould and Tureck for Bach.
I'm with Drasko.
Michelangeli is the only pianist here who is great regardless of the composer he has played.
Quote from: Howard on June 29, 2008, 02:32:07 PM
If by Michelangeli you mean Richter, then we are in complete agreement. :D
I'm not crazy for Richter's Chopin (or Bach) :-[
Of course the two are not exactly comparable. With the limited repertoire he kept, Michelangeli holds an unfair advantage :)
Quote from: Don on June 29, 2008, 12:30:36 PM
I'd take Gould and Tureck for Bach.
I should have also noted Craig Sheppard.
Quote from: orbital on June 29, 2008, 03:32:53 PM
With the limited repertoire he kept, Michelangeli holds an unfair advantage :)
Yes, a very important point.
Quote from: Don on June 29, 2008, 03:36:41 PM
I should have also noted Craig Sheppard.
What about Wolfgang Rübsam? With a gun in front of my head I would say Rübsam.
Quote from: Howard on June 29, 2008, 04:04:58 PM
You mean you like someone's Bach? ;)
Yes!
Weissenberg. ;D
and Gould and
Nikolayeva
Quote from: Howard on June 29, 2008, 04:13:06 PM
Oh, yeah. I got his GPOTTC set recently. I'll need to give it a spin.
Great. That was one of the more difficult ones to find in the series.
You are in for a surprise regarding Debussy. I bet you've never heard Debussy played like that. You'll either love it hate it. There are also a few Scarlatti pieces there that are not available separately AFAIK. The 2 or 3 tracks of Scriabin are also of high interest. I hope you enjoy it.
Quote from: Howard on June 29, 2008, 04:22:24 PM
So far the Bach sounds good.
Was it the 6th Partita that was included there? I don't have the playlist with me. If it is, it is gold Howard... gold!
(http://www.cnn.com/SHOWBIZ/9710/21/stars.series/link.hytner.jpg)
Quote from: Howard on June 29, 2008, 04:27:19 PM
BTW Banya would make a splendid avatar! >:D
Yes, but only if one can find a more animated expression.. such as the one he does when saying "Gold Jerry.. gold" :D
Why isn't Liberace on that list?
Quote from: orbital on June 29, 2008, 03:32:53 PM
With the limited repertoire he kept, Michelangeli holds an unfair advantage :)
this is something that should be celebrated as a matter of intelligence and something that other pianists should emulate
Quote from: ezodisy on June 29, 2008, 10:50:07 PM
this is something that should be celebrated as a matter of intelligence and something that other pianists should emulate
Yes, maybe, but a pianist of ABMs ability should have had a more eclectic repertoire. I don't necessarily see it as intelligence, more like pedantry. In the last decade of his life he started to branch out (hence the 5 LvB Ctos for example) but it was a bit too late.
(For the record, I voted Kempff.)
Quote from: Holden on June 30, 2008, 12:13:24 AM
Yes, maybe, but a pianist of ABMs ability should have had a more eclectic repertoire.
Not in my view. Most pianists, with less ability, should play less repertoire. The fact Michelangeli had more ability (than pretty much anyone in any way) doesn't imply he should serve the public more than he did.
QuoteIn the last decade of his life he started to branch out (hence the 5 LvB Ctos for example) but it was a bit too late.
Like Zimerman, his repertoire was much larger than what he fed the public. It's nothing about being late IMO, it's about developing as an artist. If memory serves, in a recent radio interview with the BBC Zimerman mentioned how in spite of having Beethoven's op. 111 in his fingers for many, many years, he was only just playing it in public. The same sense of fruition would probably apply to Michelangeli.
People often comment on Richter's huge repertoire (and that in spite of avowing he only plays what he likes and what he thinks he can contribute to). In private pianists like Zimerman and Michelangeli probably have/had just as large a repertoire. The fact they reserve(d) it is irrelevant, and the fact that Richter played his in public shouldn't give him any more credit, IMO.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 02:33:55 AM
Not in my view. Most pianists, with less ability, should play less repertoire. The fact Michelangeli had more ability (than pretty much anyone in any way) doesn't imply he should serve the public more than he did.
Like Zimerman, his repertoire was much larger than what he fed the public. It's nothing about being late IMO, it's about developing as an artist. If memory serves, in a recent radio interview with the BBC Zimerman mentioned how in spite of having Beethoven's op. 111 in his fingers for many, many years, he was only just playing it in public. The same sense of fruition would probably apply to Michelangeli.
People often comment on Richter's huge repertoire (and that in spite of avowing he only plays what he likes and what he thinks he can contribute to). In private pianists like Zimerman and Michelangeli probably have/had just as large a repertoire. The fact they reserve(d) it is irrelevant, and the fact that Richter played his in public shouldn't give him any more credit, IMO.
I'm not sure I agree with this. I have read that Michelangeli was a noted perfectionist who would sometimes refuse to play a concert if, in a pre-concert rehearsal, he wasn't playing up to his own standards--or perhaps for some non-related musical reason. As fabulous a pianist as he was, it would seem he had insecurity issues. (Most great musicians do, but the issues often don't make them refuse to play. :o) Perhaps he felt that much of the music he played was "less than perfect" and therefore not playable in public. But as a performer myself, I understand very clearly that I were to wait till I had achieved perfection, I'd never play at all! :-\
I would have loved to hear Michelangeli play more pieces even if he wasn't "perfect" by his standards. But maybe he couldn't do that and stay true to himself. Still, I'd have loved to hear him branch out a bit.
I'm beginning to think that applying a ranking system to artists is rather silly. ;D
Quote from: jochanaan on June 30, 2008, 05:53:37 AM
I'm not sure I agree with this. I have read that Michelangeli was a noted perfectionist who would sometimes refuse to play a concert if, in a pre-concert rehearsal, he wasn't playing up to his own standards--or perhaps for some non-related musical reason. As fabulous a pianist as he was, it would seem he had insecurity issues. (Most great musicians do, but the issues often don't make them refuse to play. :o) Perhaps he felt that much of the music he played was "less than perfect" and therefore not playable in public. But as a performer myself, I understand very clearly that I were to wait till I had achieved perfection, I'd never play at all! :-\
I would have loved to hear Michelangeli play more pieces even if he wasn't "perfect" by his standards. But maybe he couldn't do that and stay true to himself. Still, I'd have loved to hear him branch out a bit.
see bold - that is one way to understand it. But as a performer yourself, couldn't you also understand it by saying that it really doesn't matter what an audience wants? And how is it possible that an audience can call someone insecure who has given perfect, even inhuman performances of pieces? Does that even make sense?
QuoteGood points, jochanaan.
Would you like to contribute something?
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 08:21:36 AM
As to Michelangeli's greatness, I think that it is hard to know how fabulous a pianist he was, given that all we can hear are the works that he feels he can play well.
Listen I didn't mean to set you up for a fall, but this has to be the stupidest thing said on GMG since Saul last posted. Here is Michelangeli's discography:
http://www.andrewfwilson.co.uk/abm1.htm
After seeing that, and, presumably, after listening to his live recordings, are you still going to sit there and say that it is hard to know how fabulous a pianist he was?
QuoteI chose Richter because he covered a vast amount of repertoire, played most of it damn well and showed a more human side in his interpretations.
No argument with your choice--a choice is personal after all. I'm only arguing with some of these wacky comments about insecurity and being unable to tell that he was a fabulous pianist (surely more your fault than his).
Okay, just ordered 20 CDs of Michelangeli, thanks (or no thanks) to this thread.
Quote from: Mn Dave on June 30, 2008, 08:41:14 AM
Okay, just ordered 20 CDs of Michelangeli, thanks (or no thanks) to this thread.
buy the live recrdoings.
from Testament:
(http://img.hmv.co.jp/image/jacket/190/01/1/2/767.jpg)
from Altarus:
(http://img.hmv.co.jp/image/jacket/400/14/2/7/191.jpg)
from BBC legends:
(http://img.hmv.co.jp/image/jacket/190/26/0/5/339.jpg)
from Diapason:
(http://img.hmv.co.jp/image/jacket/400/25/9/0/632.jpg)
2 10-CD sets from Documents. Hell, if he didn't record that much, then that should be the bulk of it, right?
$45 ;D
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 09:16:23 AM
Yeah, I got those as well. I enjoyed them the first time through, but I haven't gone back to them yet.
Well, at least you enjoyed them. I guess I done good then.
Quote from: Mn Dave on June 30, 2008, 09:13:31 AM
2 10-CD sets from Documents. Hell, if he didn't record that much, then that should be the bulk of it, right?
$45 ;D
I would suggest you cancel them unless you don't care for piano tone at all. Try the BBC Legends 3CD set, it contains a range of recordings from the late '50s to the '80s.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 09:30:03 AM
I would suggest you cancel them unless you don't care for piano tone at all. Try the BBC Legends 3CD set, it contains a range of recordings from the late '50s to the '80s.
Is the sound really that bad? They received high ratings (on Amazon anyway).
Thanks for the recommendation.
Quote from: Mn Dave on June 30, 2008, 09:33:37 AM
Is the sound really that bad? They received high ratings (on Amazon anyway).
Thanks for the recommendation.
I haven't heard them, my opinion is based on other sets that I picked up on Documents. If you buy it chances are you'll end up with the same reaction as Howard (hasn't gone back to them).
The basic point is that if you care about piano music those big sets are just not the way to go as you get ripped off by crap remastering which screws up the piano sound. I would have thought that pretty obvious.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 09:38:32 AM
The basic point is that if you care about piano music those big sets are just not the way to go as you get ripped off by crap remastering which screws up the piano sound. I would have thought that pretty obvious.
Does Documents bother to remaster? I thought they just re-release recordings inexpensively.
...Although I did buy a Chopin box from them that sounded like crap. ;D
I don't know the technicalities Dave. My experience was similar to Urania and Iron Needle -- heavily filtered. Sometimes it makes the piano sound like it's under water. With a pianist like Michelangeli who had more tonal colour than possibly any other pianist, the Document set is just a waste of time honestly.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 09:44:02 AM
I don't know the technicalities Dave. My experience was similar to Urania and Iron Needle -- heavily filtered. Sometimes it makes the piano sound like it's under water. With a pianist like Michelangeli who had more tonal colour than possibly any other pianist, the Document set is just a waste of time honestly.
Okay. Thanks for the warning.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 07:47:49 AM
see bold - that is one way to understand it. But as a performer yourself, couldn't you also understand it by saying that it really doesn't matter what an audience wants?
That's a valid viewpoint--just one I happen to disagree with. Music is a thing that grows
between the performer and the listeners, so the audience's needs are also important. And yes, we performers may know more than audiences about what they'd REALLY like ;D, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take their reactions into account.
Besides, I've learned over the years that audiences will forgive any number of technical errors if the performer "reaches out and touches." S/he does this by facing his/her fears and opening her/his heart. I've found that audiences tend to respond to openness with openness. :D
(I should add that many great musicians go the way of Michelangeli, or become "control freaks" or otherwise try to nail down every last detail in their musicmaking; but I have rather deliberately chosen to follow a more instinctive path, trusting in heightened awareness during the performance rather than too-extensive preparation beforehand. It requires a certain bravado--but it works more often than not. :))
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 07:47:49 AM
And how is it possible that an audience can call someone insecure who has given perfect, even inhuman performances of pieces? Does that even make sense?
Perhaps an audience can't tell--but I tell you, we performers are always our own worst critics. What is "perfection" to an audience is no such thing to one who's always striving, as Michelangeli was, for a higher level of perfection. I know this; I live in this state. :-\
Quote from: jochanaan on June 30, 2008, 09:50:25 AM
That's a valid viewpoint--just one I happen to disagree with. Music is a thing that grows between the performer and the listeners, so the audience's needs are also important. And yes, we performers may know more than audiences about what they'd REALLY like ;D, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take their reactions into account.
Besides, I've learned over the years that audiences will forgive any number of technical errors if the performer "reaches out and touches." S/he does this by facing his/her fears and opening her/his heart. I've found that audiences tend to respond to openness with openness. :DPerhaps an audience can't tell--but I tell you, we performers are always our own worst critics. What is "perfection" to an audience is no such thing to one who's always striving, as Michelangeli was, for a higher level of perfection. I know this; I live in this state. :-\
I agree. The thing is that it is impossible to imagine an audience, sitting in front of Michelangeli, whispering to each other that they wish his repertoire were larger (it was always eclectic). That could never happen, not when hearing such incomparable playing. This apparently limited repertoire only becomes a problem now that he has passed away, to those, IMO, who are more interested in collecting than listening (or you could say in quantity to quality). (I don't mean you, by the way). But then no doubt there are lots of things to complain about when you consider how much is judged by recordings or recording quantity alone.
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 10:07:43 AM
Unfortunately, no action was taken.
I should hope not considering that most of the mods weren't even on this board while I was swearing and complaining back in the day.
Quote
I got that Testament you recommended recently so I will listen to it ASAP and report back.
Well that is just a slight improvement over the Documents set that you bought. It's also one of the great piano recitals caught on tape.
Quote
Surely any comments on his mental state are going to be speculation.
Surely any comments on his mental state from any other than his own family and friends could only be uttered by absolute morons. The fact that you are even thinking about doing this puts you very close to that group.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 09:44:02 AM
I don't know the technicalities Dave. My experience was similar to Urania and Iron Needle -- heavily filtered. Sometimes it makes the piano sound like it's under water. With a pianist like Michelangeli who had more tonal colour than possibly any other pianist, the Document set is just a waste of time honestly.
Don't think Documents did anything soundwise here, these are straight repackaging of Aura discs.
Quote from: Drasko on June 30, 2008, 10:25:36 AM
Don't think Documents did anything soundwise here, these are straight repackaging of Aura discs.
How do you know? And is that good or bad? Thanks.
Quote from: Drasko on June 30, 2008, 10:25:36 AM
Don't think Documents did anything soundwise here, these are straight repackaging of Aura discs.
Is it Aura? I didn't know that -- didn't bother to check once I heard the name of the label. I used to have the entire Aura collection in that Michelangeli box which contained the personal memoirs written by his wife. That's a very good collection even if not a first (or second or third) choice, IMO.
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 10:23:34 AM
I'm confused. If it's one of the great piano recitals, why is it only a slight improvement? (Or was that sarcasm?)
Yeah I was just joking. I am really bored. We probably wouldn't be arguing over a table, but because it's the internet, we should try to keep up appearances.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 10:33:36 AM
Yeah I was just joking. I am really bored. We probably wouldn't be arguing over a table, but because it's the internet, we should try to keep up appearances.
Boredom will do strange things to a man. Witness: it has me posting in
this thread... ::)
I know there is an essential obligation to Internet standards involved here, but do let's try to keep it on a civil level please. :)
I was here when you were swearing and complaining, back in the day. Not being a mod at the time (they didn't exist then), I found it modestly amusing. And here, you're not doing either. Just being, perhaps, a tad
too personal.
And I know that Howard really wants to take thing a tad
less personal, so maybe we can find some common ground, so I can go back to work. ;)
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 30, 2008, 10:43:45 AM
Boredom will do strange things to a man. Witness: it has me posting in this thread... ::)
I know there is an essential obligation to Internet standards involved here, but do let's try to keep it on a civil level please. :)
I was here when you were swearing and complaining, back in the day. Not being a mod at the time (they didn't exist then), I found it modestly amusing. And here, you're not doing either. Just being, perhaps, a tad too personal.
And I know that Howard really wants to take thing a tad less personal, so maybe we can find some common ground, so I can go back to work. ;)
8)
$:)
QuoteThanks Gurn, it appears that things are safely back on track.
Whatever that means. I would just suggest that you listen to a pianist and forget everything that has to do with quantity. Also don't waste your money on inherently cheap products. There's quite a lot that Richter played that it would have been better if he hadn't -- like Chopin, IMO. See what you make of the Testament recital.
Quote from: Mn Dave on June 30, 2008, 10:27:55 AM
How do you know? And is that good or bad? Thanks.
Because I compared them. That is good. These are mostly live radio recordings spanning 50 years (early 40s to early 90s) and the sound quality is according, from excellent to poor and everything in between.
I think Documents sets are essential for Michelangeli enthusiast since some of the stuff is unavailable anywhere else and some of it is better than anywhere else, but are those recommendable for newcomer, don't really know. 20 discs a lot of material and there are few odd performances in there that could give you skewed impressions (like Helsinki Debussy Images or some very late Chopin).
In my opinion best way to start with anything is with couple well chosen discs (and Sidoze mentioned some of those) but on the other hand those two sets are ridiculously cheap (I got mine for $35 for both) and for that money even if you don't like them you can use them as paper weights, bookholders or something.
So, I don't think you'll be wasting money on these but will you be getting maximum out of them I don't really know.
Quote from: Drasko on June 30, 2008, 11:42:10 AM
Because I compared them. That is good. These are mostly live radio recordings spanning 50 years (early 40s to early 90s) and the sound quality is according, from excellent to poor and everything in between.
I think Documents sets are essential for Michelangeli enthusiast since some of the stuff is unavailable anywhere else and some of it is better than anywhere else, but are those recommendable for newcomer, don't really know. 20 discs a lot of material and there are few odd performances in there that could give you skewed impressions (like Helsinki Debussy Images or some very late Chopin).
In my opinion best way to start with anything is with couple well chosen discs (and Sidoze mentioned some of those) but on the other hand those two sets are ridiculously cheap (I got mine for $35 for both) and for that money even if you don't like them you can use them as paper weights, bookholders or something.
So, I don't think you'll be wasting money on these but will you be getting maximum out of them I don't really know.
Thanks. I decided to take my chances since, as you say, they are ridiculously cheap.
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 11:26:08 AM
My suggestion for you is to avoid scaring people away from listening to things, especially when you haven't even heard them, like the Michelangeli sets Dave asked about above. ::)
If it's the Aura set then I know it and I wouldn't recommend it as an intro. It has some good things in it but there's a lot of superfluous stuff too -- basically the same rule as all box-sets. If the sound is the same then it's okay. I don't know how much you know about piano recordings, but I would guess the Testament will be an ear opener, hopefully.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 09:09:11 AM
from BBC legends:
(http://img.hmv.co.jp/image/jacket/190/26/0/5/339.jpg)
Isn't that the one that Drasko had once nominated as one recording that should go to recycling bin (due to its horrendous sound) ?
Quote from: Mn Dave on June 30, 2008, 11:47:22 AM
Thanks. I decided to take my chances since, as you say, they are ridiculously cheap.
Dave and do consider this one:
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00000E2VC/sr=1-1/qid=1214863510/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music&qid=1214863510&sr=1-1)
http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Mazurkas-Prelude-Op-Scherso/dp/B00000E2VC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1214863510&sr=1-1
Quote from: orbital on June 30, 2008, 02:04:10 PM
Dave and do consider this one:
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00000E2VC/sr=1-1/qid=1214863510/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music&qid=1214863510&sr=1-1)
http://www.amazon.com/Chopin-Mazurkas-Prelude-Op-Scherso/dp/B00000E2VC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1214863510&sr=1-1
Will do. I have it wishlisted now.
Quote from: orbital on June 30, 2008, 02:04:10 PM
Isn't that the one that Drasko had once nominated as one recording that should go to recycling bin (due to its horrendous sound) ?
I don't know....maybe? It sounds pretty good to me -- the hall for the set of Debussy Preludes captures his sound better than on the DG recording IMO. Some of the recordings are old from the late '50s and are a bit muffled but I know Drasko has heard a lot worse.
Quote from: premont on June 29, 2008, 03:56:54 PM
What about Wolfgang Rübsam? With a gun in front of my head I would say Rübsam.
Yes, duly noted.
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 08:21:36 AM
I chose Richter because he covered a vast amount of repertoire, played most of it damn well and showed a more human side in his interpretations.
For me, extensive repertoire has little significance. That's why I wasn't particularly impressed with Joyce Hatto even before the fraud was identified.
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 10:06:14 AM
I agree. The thing is that it is impossible to imagine an audience, sitting in front of Michelangeli, whispering to each other that they wish his repertoire were larger (it was always eclectic). That could never happen, not when hearing such incomparable playing.
You'll get no argument from me about that! :D As long as he didn't cancel. :o :-\
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 10:06:14 AM
This apparently limited repertoire only becomes a problem now that he has passed away, to those, IMO, who are more interested in collecting than listening (or you could say in quantity to quality). (I don't mean you, by the way). But then no doubt there are lots of things to complain about when you consider how much is judged by recordings or recording quantity alone.
Indeed. And his repertoire WAS eclectic, which is a virtue in my book. 0:)
Quote from: Don on June 30, 2008, 02:33:27 PM
For me, extensive repertoire has little significance...
It has more significance if it's well played. 8)
Quote from: Howard on June 30, 2008, 10:07:43 AM
In case you are wondering why I haven't responded to this, it's because I didn't feel that you were treating me with respect. I reported this to the moderators, as I know that this is clearly against forum policy.
I'm surprised you are so proud to point out that you're a "reporter to the moderators". My view is that each of us is quite capable of holding our own ground without resorting to such actions. Just my opinion.
Quote from: orbital on June 30, 2008, 02:04:10 PM
Isn't that the one that Drasko had once nominated as one recording that should go to recycling bin (due to its horrendous sound) ?
No, it isn't. This is the disgusting one.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31HJVCYMNYL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
Quote from: Drasko on June 30, 2008, 05:21:02 PM
No, it isn't. This is the disgusting one.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31HJVCYMNYL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
Oh sorry then. I remembered it being a BBC release.
I voted for Richter.
I have edited this post to fit into forum guidelines
This is too funny. I was thinking to myself that this Howard sounds a bit like George with his uninformed arguments and whining to the mods. Now it turns out that he has deleted his posts and has changed his name back. Well some things never change. He still doesn't know anything about Michelangeli but that of course doesn't stop him from saying all sorts of b...s....
For the sake of clarity I've included a snippet of George's love of mankind in my signature.
George, all the blankets of wise words and goodwill will not help to control the anger you feel. There are things you can do to help yourself such as trying to let it out -- do whatever it is you're trying to stop yourself from doing (barring rape and murder, naturally), and let it out of your mind through your body and into a real, indelible fact of action. If you persist in trying to create a fantasy of the person who isn't you, you will just keep falling into further frustration and traps and will end up being hated by people who can see through your words and your benign appearance. It will also help you shrug off this victim mentality that keeps you hunched over. Goodluck.
You missed one word, ::) Tony, good try though! uffeviking $:)
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 01:47:02 AM
You missed one word, ::) Tony, good try though! uffeviking $:)
Why is it you mods never filter or delete the posts made by the passive-aggressive types who seem to dominate the forum these days?
QuoteNice choice! What are some of your favorite recordings by him?
George, have you considered listening to recordings in full before coming to your conclusions? I remember how you condemned Josef Hofmann's Moonlight Sonata. Then I learned that you had listened to it through an Amazon clip, and not even the full first movement. Do you realise that one of your idols, Rachmaninoff, thought Hofmann the greatest pianist he'd ever heard? Is that how you respect 2 geniuses, by slighting one and ignoring the other? At least have the decency and maturity to respond.
Richter
Quote from: Drasko on July 02, 2008, 08:58:09 AM
Heard Schiff? Interesting take.
Nope, if you have it could you upload it please? I've been listening to this piece quite a lot lately.
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 11:27:19 AM
Nope, if you have it could you upload it please?
I can do better, check PM.
Quote from: George on July 02, 2008, 07:13:07 AM
I just checked the current standings and I must say, I couldn't be happier with the results. 8)
Richter is the Beethoven of pianists. There is no way he can lose >:D
Quote from: George on July 02, 2008, 02:12:49 PM
;D
Have you ever tried listening to a pianist still alive, like
Mikhail Pletnev or
Grigory Sokolov? ???
Quote from: uffeviking on July 02, 2008, 02:29:32 PM
Have you ever tried listening to a pianist still alive, like Mikhail Pletnev or Grigory Sokolov? ???
You're wasting your time Uffe.
Quote from: uffeviking on July 02, 2008, 02:29:32 PM
Have you ever tried listening to a pianist still alive, like Mikhail Pletnev or Grigory Sokolov? ???
Are they greater because they are alive? ???
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 07:09:45 AM
Why is it you mods never filter or delete the posts made by the passive-aggressive types who seem to dominate the forum these days?
Unnecessarily pointed comment purged.
Quote from: George on July 02, 2008, 02:36:12 PM
I think you are confused. This thread is not about those pianists, nor is it about living pianists.
Oops! My mistake. I thought the thread was titled "Pianists," not "Dead Pianists." Or even "Dead Male Pianists." ;D
I don't read polls, neither do I participate in polls be they about pianists or politicians!
Now please scroll back to the U-Tube of Sokolov playing Beethoven, listen, close your eyes, relax and have a pleasant night! :-*
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 07:09:45 AM
Why is it you mods never filter or delete the posts made by the passive-aggressive types who seem to dominate the forum these days?
George, have you considered listening to recordings in full before coming to your conclusions? I remember how you condemned Josef Hofmann's Moonlight Sonata. Then I learned that you had listened to it through an Amazon clip, and not even the full first movement. Do you realise that one of your idols, Rachmaninoff, thought Hofmann the greatest pianist he'd ever heard? Is that how you respect 2 geniuses, by slighting one and ignoring the other? At least have the decency and maturity to respond.
Well, if you're annoyed by the passive-aggressive types, then allow me to jettison the passive part.
You do understand that your constant whining is every bit as nauseating as the very stuff you're always on about? (Answer optional...)
And as far as this dumb little ditty:
Quote from: ezodisy on June 30, 2008, 10:19:05 AM
Surely any comments on his mental state from any other than his own family and friends could only be uttered by absolute morons. The fact that you are even thinking about doing this puts you very close to that group.
You, yourself, once tried to convince me that Richter performed better in the east because he *quote*
"felt more comfortable there". Which is what, exactly? Why, it's an attempt to assess his mental state! So if it's a . you're looking for, the mirror is right there...
Dear Don: Would you call ezodisy that name to his face, in a real meeting? Of course not, that's why I deleted it. - Have a pleasant evening, or morning, or whatever time of day it is where you are. :)
uffeviking $:)
QuoteDear Don: Would you call ezodisy that name to his face, in a real meeting? Of course not, that's why I deleted it. :)
I'd say 50/50. ;D ;D (kidding, Sid)
Interestingly enough, on another thread
Monsieur Croche and I just had a most edifying chat about caustic knee-jerk responses. Seems I'm just as guilty as the next guy... ;D
Yeah, I am one of those next guys too...sometimes it is just so satisifying to be savage and direct...but then the blood calms and the aftermath is not so great. That was a really positive exchange on the other thread. Sets me up for breakfast.
Mike
I still think "Liberace" should be on that list.
wow some great activity here last night.
Quote from: George on July 02, 2008, 07:36:21 PM
Yes, it was clear from your post that you didn't read the poll. It doesn't change the fact that your were off topic.
maybe
you should be a moderator, George.
Uffe, please take no notice of someone who isn't quite prepared to return the undeserved attention of a charming, sensitive woman.
QuoteSokolov has failed to impress me in the past
Let's hope you gave him more than the 180 seconds that you allotted to Hofmann and, probably, Michelangeli.
Quote
You, yourself, once tried to convince me that Richter performed better in the east because he *quote* "felt more comfortable there". Which is what, exactly? Why, it's an attempt to assess his mental state! So if it's a . you're looking for, the mirror is right there...
One point you are missing Don -- Richter himself admitted that Russia was his home which he loved and felt comfortable in. That is a BIG difference from what George was trying to say about Michelangeli (Michelangeli, a genius at the piano, criticsed by someone who has only listened to a tiny percentage of his recordings once!). No, I don't have the relevant Richter quote at hand, though it's in the literature and I'm positive he expressed it more than once. For some reason you seem to ignore that. Anyway, it is fairly common knowledge among people who like and listen to him (barring perhaps one particular poster in this thread).
QuoteYou do understand that your constant whining is every bit as nauseating as the very stuff you're always on about? (Answer optional...)
Don, I consider it an insult that you would call what I do whining. First of all I only wish to ever argue with those who have not given their time and attention before forming an opinion (like the poster above). I do NOT wish to argue with people who just have a different informed opinion. Second of all, far from whining I hope to follow Mike Tyson's example in a verbal-only manner: "I try to catch him right on the tip of the nose, because I try to push the bone into the brain."
Quote from: DavidRoss on July 02, 2008, 06:22:32 PM
Unnecessarily pointed comment purged.
David, I take it your comment was moderatored for issuing an unncessarily pointed comment towards one of the pianists in this thread. There is really no need for that. They are all dead, after all, and couldn't respond to defend themselves against your overly aggressive manner.
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 11:54:45 PM
David, I take it your comment was moderatored for issuing an unncessarily pointed comment towards one of the pianists in this thread. There is really no need for that. They are all dead, after all, and couldn't respond to defend themselves against your overly aggressive manner.
No, Tony, I just thought comment deleted for thoughtlessness Liberace's little dog, too!
Just to remind all involved how great a pianist Richter was:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDUTTRGOJdE
Quote from: Iago on July 02, 2008, 09:54:13 PM
I still think "Liberace" should be on that list.
On what basis, Iago?
Quote from: jochanaan on July 03, 2008, 10:14:29 AM
On what basis, Iago?
Probably because Iago has the same fashion sense.
Quote from: Iago on July 02, 2008, 09:54:13 PM
I still think "Liberace" should be on that list.
Well, he
is dead, but he was not dead good.
Mike
Quote from: jochanaan on July 03, 2008, 10:14:29 AM
On what basis, Iago?
It's just an opinion. And unlike the other professorial types, doyens of taste and aficionados of talent, that populate this forum, I see no necessity to offer any reasons for an OPINION. And I also think that Skitch Henderson and Victor Borge belong on that list as well.
Quote from: Iago on July 03, 2008, 04:37:58 PM
It's just an opinion. And unlike the other professorial types, doyens of taste and aficionados of talent, that populate this forum, I see no necessity to offer any reasons for an OPINION. And I also think that Skitch Henderson and Victor Borge belong on that list as well.
I saw Liberace many times when he was in his prime. He could really play the piano. Where he went wrong was in being an entertainer. ::) Borge made the same mistake, but in the rare moments when he seriously plays, he can.. seriously play. I thought Skitch Henderson played the oboe or something like that. :-\
Professor Blanston ;)
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Hummel Op 087 Piano Quintet - The Music Collection - Hummel Quintet in Eb for Piano & Strings Op 87 1st mvmt
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 07:09:45 AM
Why is it you mods never filter or delete the posts made by the passive-aggressive types who seem to dominate the forum these days?
Because diagnosing and attempting to cure a mental problem, if indeed that's what it is, is not in our brief. Even if I actually WAS a shrink, I wouldn't diagnose over an Internet forum. ::) I can't even be entirely sure that those who are unable to ignore the lure of a PA don't have problems of their own. So I, for one, avoid it altogether and stick to trying to Rodney King this herd of cats. :)
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Hummel Op 087 Piano Quintet - The Music Collection - Hummel Quintet in Eb for Piano & Strings Op 87 2nd mvmt
http://www.youtube.com/v/F-p47zawto8
Kitsch, Kitsch and more Kitsch!
Quote from: Iago on July 03, 2008, 04:37:58 PM
It's just an opinion. And unlike the other professorial types, doyens of taste and aficionados of talent, that populate this forum, I see no necessity to offer any reasons for an OPINION. And I also think that Skitch Henderson and Victor Borge belong on that list as well.
Fair enough. And while I don't know Skitch about Henderson ;D, I would certainly grant Borge a place among the greats--if only for "Phonetic Punctuation." ;D ;D
Quote from: ezodisy on July 02, 2008, 11:54:45 PM
Don, I consider it an insult that you would call what I do whining. First of all I only wish to ever argue with those who have not given their time and attention before forming an opinion (like the poster above).
But you're no saint either, Tony. You grandstand with the best of them. That's really what I'm driving at.
To illustrate my point there's the "Richter felt more comfortable in the east" thing. This is one of your pet ideas and granted is interesting to mull over and kick around with 'the gang' but really isn't borne out by anything empirical. IOW, it's campfire material that's little more than breezy, makeweight banter.
But that would be different if you could offer anything material to bolster such a stance. Then there would be no choice but to consider your theory and judge it accordingly.
But in the past when I've pressed you on the issue I get nothing that resembles "careful study" (time and attention, as you put it). At most I get comments that amount to "I'm able to pick it out by my superior skills of discernment" and such. And when further pressed on the issue things get even more fuzzy. In all our Richter east/west discussions you haven't offered one tangible bit of evidence to bolster such a claim. There's certainly nothing in the literature that overwhelmingly points to this. I should know, I've spent lots of time (years) reading about Richter. Which ticks me off even more since you've obviously read VERY little about the man. No one who's spent dedicated time actually studying the literature about Richter would come to your conclusion. NO ONE!
And that's the rub.
You then come onto this thread and take others to task when in reality it's your own storehouse that could use some tidying up.
Like I said, fireside chatting about the Richter/comfort issue is one thing (and fun ;)), but erudite discussion - which is how you frequently position yourself, I hasten to add - is quite another.
Anyway, to put some closure on this fine point about Richter's sympathies, here are a few snippets from Monsaingeon's
Conversations and Notebooks that should effectively put the issue to bed:
In Richter's own words:"I've never felt any difference between concerts in Russia and concerts abroad...[snip] I'm interested in everything new and, to tell the truth, I'd much rather have got to know the whole world than have to visit the same place twice." [p.95]
"Prague was the first foreign city I visited, in 1950. It remains one of my favourite cities, along with Venice, Paris and Vienna." [p.96]
"For years, the Fêtes Musicales de Touraine [his festival near Tours, France] were one of the greatest delights of my life. While touring France in the early sixties, I took time off to explore the Touraine and see for myself its famous châteaux. I was so attracted by them that I immediately thought of organizing concerts there. But their poor acoustics and the size of the rooms that were shown to me made this dream impossible, at least until the architect Pierre Boille told me about a thirteenth-century barn that seemed to meet my criteria, the Grange de Meslay. When I went there, it was full of hay and hens were running around everywhere, but I fell in love with it there and then. I asked for the necessary acoustic changes to be made, and we set to work. I'd imagined the Fêtes Musicales as a real celebration, in which music would be central to other delights and everyone would have time to meet everyone else, an idea that reflects the lightness of the place and of the air. [snip] I'm not always sure that the locals were aware of the quality of the programmes on offer, but the Fêtes Musicales were soon being talked about not just in France but elsewhere, too, and even as far afield as Russia." [p.151]
Pretty cool about the hens bit, huh? :)
So there it is. In general the above is the overriding theme of the book - that of an artist with a voracious appetite seeking sustenance in whatever province caught his fancy. East or west holding zero relevance...
Quote from: knight on July 02, 2008, 09:47:53 PM
Yeah, I am one of those next guys too...sometimes it is just so satisfying to be savage and direct...but then the blood calms and the aftermath is not so great. That was a really positive exchange on the other thread. Sets me up for breakfast.
Mike
Mike,
It would be nice if we could some day turn the argument concept on its ear...considering the aftermath BEFORE we even open our knee-jerk mouths.
Although I await some guidance on just how to accomplish this... ;D
Quote from: donwyn on July 03, 2008, 08:44:27 PM
But you're no saint either, Tony. You grandstand with the best of them. That's really what I'm driving at.
To illustrate my point there's the "Richter felt more comfortable in the east" thing. This is one of your pet ideas and granted is interesting to mull over and kick around with 'the gang' but really isn't borne out by anything empirical. IOW, it's campfire material that's little more than breezy, makeweight banter.
But that would be different if you could offer anything material to bolster such a stance. Then there would be no choice but to consider your theory and judge it accordingly.
But in the past when I've pressed you on the issue I get nothing that resembles "careful study" (time and attention, as you put it). At most I get comments that amount to "I'm able to pick it out by my superior skills of discernment" and such. And when further pressed on the issue things get even more fuzzy. In all our Richter east/west discussions you haven't offered one tangible bit of evidence to bolster such a claim. There's certainly nothing in the literature that overwhelmingly points to this. I should know, I've spent lots of time (years) reading about Richter. Which ticks me off even more since you've obviously read VERY little about the man. No one who's spent dedicated time actually studying the literature about Richter would come to your conclusion. NO ONE!
And that's the rub.
You then come onto this thread and take others to task when in reality it's your own storehouse that could use some tidying up.
Like I said, fireside chatting about the Richter/comfort issue is one thing (and fun ;)), but erudite discussion - which is how you frequently position yourself, I hasten to add - is quite another.
Anyway, to put some closure on this fine point about Richter's sympathies, here are a few snippets from Monsaingeon's Conversations and Notebooks that should effectively put the issue to bed:
In Richter's own words:
"I've never felt any difference between concerts in Russia and concerts abroad...[snip] I'm interested in everything new and, to tell the truth, I'd much rather have got to know the whole world than have to visit the same place twice." [p.95]
"Prague was the first foreign city I visited, in 1950. It remains one of my favourite cities, along with Venice, Paris and Vienna." [p.96]
"For years, the Fêtes Musicales de Touraine [his festival near Tours, France] were one of the greatest delights of my life. While touring France in the early sixties, I took time off to explore the Touraine and see for myself its famous châteaux. I was so attracted by them that I immediately thought of organizing concerts there. But their poor acoustics and the size of the rooms that were shown to me made this dream impossible, at least until the architect Pierre Boille told me about a thirteenth-century barn that seemed to meet my criteria, the Grange de Meslay. When I went there, it was full of hay and hens were running around everywhere, but I fell in love with it there and then. I asked for the necessary acoustic changes to be made, and we set to work. I'd imagined the Fêtes Musicales as a real celebration, in which music would be central to other delights and everyone would have time to meet everyone else, an idea that reflects the lightness of the place and of the air. [snip] I'm not always sure that the locals were aware of the quality of the programmes on offer, but the Fêtes Musicales were soon being talked about not just in France but elsewhere, too, and even as far afield as Russia." [p.151]
Pretty cool about the hens bit, huh? :)
So there it is. In general the above is the overriding theme of the book - that of an artist with a voracious appetite seeking sustenance in whatever province caught his fancy. East or west holding zero relevance...
jesus what a waste of time. I was wondering -- why did he even bring up the subject again? Obviously you are still smarting from it, which is a shame, as you seem unable to take another informed opinion on board next to your own. You should know that there are just as many quotes to refute what you've used, and you should also know that I know more than a couple of people, at least as well informed as you, who have the exact same opinion as me. You are really looking for an argument, which is rather funny as there's positively no way of convincing you as you yourself have implied above. Anyway, keep thinking that. Unlike you I really don't care if another internet user draws a different opinion from mine after a lot of listening (and reading).
Quote from: donwyn on July 03, 2008, 08:44:27 PM
"Prague was the first foreign city I visited, in 1950. It remains one of my favourite cities, along with Venice, Paris and Vienna." [p.96]
One thing I will say is that you cannot suddenly start to use Prague in your argument. You and I always argued about west/east and I always subsumed Prague with the eastern bloc. Back on your side, General!!!!
Quote from: ezodisy on July 03, 2008, 11:28:43 PM
Quote from: donwyn on July 03, 2008, 08:44:27 PM
"Prague was the first foreign city I visited, in 1950. It remains one of my favourite cities, along with Venice, Paris and Vienna." [p.96]
One thing I will say is that you cannot suddenly start to use Prague in your argument. You and I always argued about west/east and I always subsumed Prague with the eastern bloc. Back on your side, General!!!!
Not that I want to barge in (no vested interests here - in fact, I haven't got a formed opinion on the matter) but the quote does mention three other cities as well. 0:)
Quote from: ezodisy on July 03, 2008, 10:56:42 PM
jesus what a waste of time. I was wondering -- why did he even bring up the subject again? Obviously you are still smarting from it, which is a shame, as you seem unable to take another informed opinion on board next to your own. You should know that there are just as many quotes to refute what you've used, and you should also know that I know more than a couple of people, at least as well informed as you, who have the exact same opinion as me. You are really looking for an argument, which is rather funny as there's positively no way of convincing you as you yourself have implied above. Anyway, keep thinking that. Unlike you I really don't care if another internet user draws a different opinion from mine after a lot of listening (and reading).
You're wondering why I brought up the subject again? I've already told you why. Honestly, after all the time we've spent with our on again/off again internet relationship I'd think you'd have learned something about me by now.
In the first place, I have no real interest in being right. I've reiterated this time and again to you as far as the Richter thing. But you don't seem to remember. Ditto other issues we've 'disagreed' on. I only seek balance, backed by informed opinion.
The Richter thing is your approach to argumentation in miniature. It's frequently your ego versus the facts. But that kind of thing won't fly. So it's not about me being right,
per se, but about you being unwilling to look at the facts objectively.
Anyway, as you say, it's probably a waste of time for me to bother with all this again...
Quote from: ezodisy on July 03, 2008, 11:28:43 PM
One thing I will say is that you cannot suddenly start to use Prague in your argument. You and I always argued about west/east and I always subsumed Prague with the eastern bloc. Back on your side, General!!!!
You're flinging ego again instead of taking the time to understand what that quote was about.
See the problem, here?
Quote from: donwyn on July 04, 2008, 09:59:08 AM
It's frequently your ego versus the facts.
I suspect you haven't noticed how ironic it is that you are doing to me exactly what you accused me of doing to Richter (prior to which I accused George of doing to Michelangeli). Stop taking yourself so seriously, Don.
Quote
Anyway, as you say, it's probably a waste of time for me to bother with all this again...
There was no reason at all to bring it up but I see you just couldn't resist flogging a dead horse once again. I hope you're not one of those people that refuses to believe someone in something until that person provides proof of it. Those people are always the easiest to deceive, and are rather sad too.
QuoteNot that I want to barge in (no vested interests here - in fact, I haven't got a formed opinion on the matter) but the quote does mention three other cities as well.
It's good you cleared that up Maciek. Being an ignorant, uncouth Englishman who had the misfortune of growing up in the states, I probably would have taken those other three cities for countries if it weren't for you.
It's official: I have lost interest in this thread. ::)
Quote from: jochanaan on July 04, 2008, 11:41:25 AM
It's official: I have lost interest in this thread. ::)
What thread? ;D
Quote from: Mn Dave on July 04, 2008, 11:43:02 AM
What thread? ;D
Don't really think donwyn and sidoze keep count how many threads they offed with their
'Where Richter Was More Comfortable' routine [thought for about a second to call it a running gag, but gags usually tend to be funny].
Quote from: ezodisy on July 04, 2008, 11:23:18 AM
Stop taking yourself so seriously, Don.
Oh, I'll try, Tony...think you can do the same?
Quote from: ezodisy on July 04, 2008, 11:23:18 AM
There was no reason at all to bring it up but I see you just couldn't resist flogging a dead horse once again. I hope you're not one of those people that refuses to believe someone in something until that person provides proof of it. Those people are always the easiest to deceive, and are rather sad too.
Sigh...
I wasn't flogging a dead horse. I ONLY brought it up again to illustrate for you your hypocrisy in attacking George...
QuoteIt's good you cleared that up Maciek. Being an ignorant, uncouth Englishman who had the misfortune of growing up in the states, I probably would have taken those other three cities for countries if it weren't for you.
I for one am glad he cleared it up. Because it obviously went over your head... ;)
Quote from: Drasko on July 04, 2008, 12:58:31 PM
Don't really think donwyn and sidoze keep count how many threads they offed with their 'Where Richter Was More Comfortable' routine [thought for about a second to call it a running gag, but gags usually tend to be funny].
Hey, once a year isn't
that bad... ;D
I wonder if our two gladiators would agree to a breather? Perhaps some on-topic posts would be good interval entertainment. Sorry I can't help in that way, all I can do here is point out the benches and supply some cooling water.
Knight
Quote from: donwyn on July 04, 2008, 08:53:37 PM
I ONLY brought it up again to illustrate for you your hypocrisy in attacking George...
I don't see it that way. George was saying something that could be inferred from Michelangeli's habits and actions. I am saying something that Richter himself said. One of the great things about Richter was that he was not the type of man to say one thing and then stick to it. He could say the opposite, or something very different, or contradict himself in some self-deprecating way. The quotes swing both ways.
There is one thing in your argument that really surprises me though -- that you think, and seem to really believe, that "NO ONE" could come to the conclusion I have. Surely you have lived long enough to know that people can come to any conclusion they prefer. Whether that conclusion is based on the same evidence, or partial evidence, on quotes or on actions or on hearsay it really doesn't matter. It is just plain ignorance to think that one conclusion is impossible -- in fact I would have thought that your conclusion of "NO ONE" would have been impossible for someone who lives in such a freakishly varied country as the US, which I lived in too. Just as there are people who actually dislike Richter's playing (surely "NO ONE" could dislike him?), there are also those who have a different opinion about him. I guess it is this "NO ONE" nonsense which keeps you waiting for the right moment to pounce with the topic again. Give it a rest, please.
QuoteI wonder if our two gladiators would agree to a breather?
Does it look like I really care about this at all? Not one bit. I am
much more interested in the psychology of a poster who has to keep bringing it up than I am in the topic itself.
In which case move it behind the scenes; as it is not relevent to the topic.
Knight
This is hardly a topic though. It only became interesting once George started to say all sorts of strange and funny things, things about Michelangeli. Don and I are saying strange and funny things about Richter, one of the topic pianists, hence....
Well it is coming across not so much as a discussion on Richter, but some deconstruction of one another's attitudes. You have just told me that it is not the topic itself that interests you. Richter, fine, but the arguing would be better conducted in private, and cannot be justified as belonging on the Music part of the board.
Mike
Quote from: knight on July 05, 2008, 12:38:27 AM
You have just told me that it is not the topic itself that interests you.
Right. I'm all Richtered out. I leave the last word to you Don. Back to the Pakistani mangoes and French films for me.
Thank you...I think there was only one poster here who could manage an argument all on his own, S_ul.
Mike
Quote from: ezodisy on July 05, 2008, 12:56:25 AM
Right. I'm all Richtered out. I leave the last word to you Don. Back to the Pakistani mangoes and French films for me.
Pakistani mangoes suck--stick with ones from the PI. And French films are for deprecating epithet stricken for potential offensiveness to snail-eaters who are light in the loafers. Real men watch obscure movies shot in grainy black & white made by pretentious directors with spiritual and intellectual depths that can be appreciated only by college sophomores.
Note for the sake of non-native English speakers and for the humor-impaired but judgmentally-inclined: This post is a joke.
Quote from: DavidRoss on July 05, 2008, 06:26:42 AM
Pakistani mangoes suck--stick with ones from the PI. And French films are for deprecating epithet stricken for potential offensiveness to snail-eaters who are light in the loafers. Real men watch obscure movies shot in grainy black & white made by pretentious directors with spiritual and intellectual depths that can be appreciated only by college sophomores.
Note for the sake of non-native English speakers and for the humor-impaired but judgmentally-inclined: This post is a joke.
Really? It wouldn't have been if
I had remainder of statement edited by the cooler heads who have prevailed... >:D
8)
----------------
Listening to:
Schubert D 803 - Nash Ensemble - Schubert Octet in F for Winds D 803 2nd mvmt
Okay, one quick note and I'll make my exit...
Quote from: ezodisy on July 05, 2008, 12:11:25 AM
I don't see it that way. George was saying something that could be inferred from Michelangeli's habits and actions. I am saying something that Richter himself said. One of the great things about Richter was that he was not the type of man to say one thing and then stick to it. He could say the opposite, or something very different, or contradict himself in some self-deprecating way.
Well, if Richter is so self-contradictory, you certainly can't take it as gospel that he "felt more comfortable in the east", now, can you?
QuoteThe quotes swing both ways.
This is what I've been trying to drive home since day one of this debate (last year)...that Richter had a heart for BOTH sides of the divide... :) :) :) :) :) :)
QuoteI am much more interested in the psychology of a poster who has to keep bringing it up than I am in the topic itself.
Well, it's really very simple:
Quote from: donwyn on July 04, 2008, 08:53:37 PM
I ONLY brought it up again to illustrate for you your hypocrisy in attacking George...
Quote from: jochanaan on July 04, 2008, 11:41:25 AM
It's official: I have lost interest in this thread. ::)
...and I have gained interest 0:)
Quote from: Lethe on July 06, 2008, 09:25:16 AM
...and I have gained interest 0:)
Yes, we are all more interested in you than in this thread!
Quote from: premont on June 29, 2008, 03:56:54 PM
What about Wolfgang Rübsam? With a gun in front of my head I would say Rübsam.
I have always known Wolfgang Rübsam's forte is Bach keyboard works ...
Quote from: Coopmv on February 07, 2009, 08:06:55 AM
I have always known Wolfgang Rübsam' forte is Bach keyboard works ...
Well, I would say mezzoforte ;)
Since Lang Lang isn't on the list, I voted for Richter. ;D
Quote from: George on February 07, 2009, 04:21:36 PM
Since Lang Lang isn't on the list, I voted for Richter. ;D
George, I know you are being fictitious. You cannot care less about Lang Lang (aka Bang Bang) just like me. ;D
Believe it or not, I consider his recently-released 2nd Chopin Piano Concerto (coupled with an uninspiring 1st) one of the most rewarding I've heard.
And his Beethoven 4th isn't at all bad, either.
Richter for me, no doubt; what an outstanding pianist!
What is it that the Richter lovers love about him? I hear a very talented, technically awesome virtuoso who sounds too calculated for my taste. I could be terribly wrong about that. Perhaps I haven't heard the right stuff yet to make me swoon at his musicality. So which recordings by him do the Richterphiles here find most appealing?
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 20, 2012, 05:22:50 AM
What is it that the Richter lovers love about him? I hear a very talented, technically awesome virtuoso who sounds too calculated for my taste. I could be terribly wrong about that. Perhaps I haven't heard the right stuff yet to make me swoon at his musicality. So which recordings by him do the Richterphiles here find most appealing?
Although I consider him one of many great pianists, I do enjoy his Bach WTC recording. He finds a nice middle ground for me there and I admire it quite a bit. The other one that gets some regular listening is the Beethoven piano sonatas. Of course, lots of competition here, but I think he holds his own here too.
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 20, 2012, 05:22:50 AM
What is it that the Richter lovers love about him? I hear a very talented, technically awesome virtuoso who sounds too calculated for my taste. I could be terribly wrong about that. Perhaps I haven't heard the right stuff yet to make me swoon at his musicality. So which recordings by him do the Richterphiles here find most appealing?
Calculating is the last word I'd choose to describe Richter. I'd probably go with poetic first, among others.
A good recording to put poetic to the test is his Rach 2 on DG on this CD, not the "Originals" remastering:
[asin]B000001G5S[/asin]
There are other adjectives for Richter (and some criticisms) but I'm out of time right now. More later. :)
Quote from: Lisztianwagner on October 20, 2012, 04:57:43 AM
Richter for me, no doubt; what an outstanding pianist!
Indeed. Took me a long time to appreciate him, but he is now my favorite pianist.
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on October 20, 2012, 06:20:16 AM
A good recording to put poetic to the test is his Rach 2 on DG on this CD, not the "Originals" remastering:
Are you saying the one remastered in the mid-nineties is not as good as the original digitization from 1985?
I don't really have a numero uno pianist but a number of whom I rank extremely highly. Three of those pianists are on the list and of those three Richter is the standout for me. Richter is non plus ultra in the performance of Rachmaninov's music and it belies the assertion that he is calculating when you hear him play the preludes and etudes that Rachmaninov wrote. His Debussy is similarly inspired and his Prokofiev is also of the highest standard.
Richter could also play the classicists and his performances of D664, D784, D894 and D960 are up there with the very best.
However, the two composers I always return to with Richter are Beethoven and Bach. I like the way that Richter plays Beethoven and I don't really know why. Yes, I enjoy other interpreters (Annie Fischer, Solomon, Kempff) but no Richter would be hard.
Richter's WTC is probably the most played work in my collection. When I'm at work and need music to listen to or work by, my cursor seems to find it's way to one of the Books by itself and I have to remind myself that I've got another 60 Gb of really good music to listen to.
Quote from: DavidRoss on October 20, 2012, 12:41:01 PM
Are you saying the one remastered in the mid-nineties is not as good as the original digitization from 1985?
Yes, exactly, David. Although I probably should clarify: I haven't heard the Rach 2 in the newer release.
However, I'm the proud owner of the
coupling to the Rach 2 - the Prokofiev 5th PC - on both the release I posted and the later "Originals" release (yes, I have it x2). What's disheartening is the transfer on the later issue (for Prok 5) isn't nearly as good as the earlier transfer. This is confirmed by George with whom I had a lengthy PM about the issue a few years ago.
What we have issue with is the disastrous piano/orchestra balance which is perfect on the earlier release but skewed totally in favor of the piano in the later release. Because of this the piano comes out sounding hectoring and unyielding which relegates the orchestra to something like a frail backup. Not anybody's idea of a good listen.
So based on this I have strong suspicions that the later release of the Rach 2 will suffer from the same miscalculation. Which doesn't do anybody - least of all Rachmaninov - any favors.
If that weren't enough, DG also stupidly changed the coupling in the later release, substituting the rollicking Prokofiev 5th with a tepid Tchaikovsky 1st PC which since its initial release has been maligned to death by everyone from hardcore fans to critics and even all the way up to Richter himself! A sad case of two giant temperaments butting heads and producing a non-starter of a performance (Karajan).
So my advice is stick with the earlier release of the Rach 2, both for the better sound (I'd bet on it) and the superior coupling.
Quote from: James on October 20, 2012, 08:18:43 AM
Some statements about Richter
Glenn Gould called Richter "one of the most powerful communicators the world of music has produced in our time".
Dmitri Shostakovich wrote of Richter: "Richter is an extraordinary phenomenon. The enormity of his talent staggers and enraptures. All the phenomena of musical art are accessible to him."
Vladimir Horowitz said: "Of the Russian pianists, I like only one, Richter."
Pierre Boulez wrote of Richter: "His personality was greater than the possibilities offered to him by the piano, broader than the very concept of complete mastery of the instrument."
Richter on playing: "...I don't play for the audience, I play for myself, and if I derive any satisfaction from it, then the audience, too, is content."
Some great documents ..
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/615D0j0TurL.jpg)
[asin]B003CP1SRE[/asin]
[asin]B007N0SVG0[/asin]
[asin]0691095493[/asin]
How intesting that that DVD is called l'insoumis in French, I didn't know that. A completely different idea from enigma, as far as I know. i'm not a native French speaker though.
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on October 20, 2012, 06:20:16 AM
Calculating is the last word I'd choose to describe Richter. I'd probably go with poetic first, among others.
Maybe I will have my eureka moment with Richter at some point, but I think he is
too poetic for my taste. Most recently I was listening to his EMI recordings of Schumann solo piano music (Fantasia in C, Papillons) and I found it too nebulous. Switch to Pollini helped me a lot. The one piece where I found Richter very convincing was the Britten Piano Concerto.
Quote from: Scarpia on October 23, 2012, 12:19:51 PM
Maybe I will have my eureka moment with Richter at some point, but I think he is too poetic for my taste. Most recently I was listening to his EMI recordings of Schumann solo piano music (Fantasia in C, Papillons) and I found it too nebulous. Switch to Pollini helped me a lot. The one piece where I found Richter very convincing was the Britten Piano Concerto.
Interesting. It's not often that I hear Richter described as too poetic. Most often it's the opposite: his extremes are too wide or too harsh.
It's hard to know where to begin with Richter, really. His recorded legacy is comprised of so many bootlegs and unauthorized issues that it's hard to know which Richter will turn up on any given recording. Or if he's hitting on all cylinders the audio side of the release is sorely lacking (take the Helsinki recital, for example). Though the majority seem to catch him in at least decent form.
The law of averages at least seems to be in our favor, with so many of his CDs out there.
Oh, well, maybe one day for you, Scarps. :)
Quote from: Dancing Divertimentian on October 23, 2012, 07:09:59 PM
Interesting. It's not often that I hear Richter described as too poetic. Most often it's the opposite: his extremes are too wide or too harsh.
It's hard to know where to begin with Richter, really. His recorded legacy is comprised of so many bootlegs and unauthorized issues that it's hard to know which Richter will turn up on any given recording. Or if he's hitting on all cylinders the audio side of the release is sorely lacking (take the Helsinki recital, for example). Though the majority seem to catch him in at least decent form.
The law of averages at least seems to be in our favor, with so many of his CDs out there.
Oh, well, maybe one day for you, Scarps. :)
I don't do bootleg/live recording thing. I have the EMI box set (couldn't resist, 14 CDs and I think it was 5 pounds on amazon.co.uk at one point). I also have a fair number of his DG recordings. But there is so much music I don't have time to listen to, it takes me a while to get around to anything in particular. Thank god my i-Deals order was cancelled. : )