Alexis Weissenberg plays Rachmaninoff Sonata 2 Part 1

[44Tili]

R.I.P Maestro Weissenberg!



[berlinzerberus]

Very good!

There is Slavic blood in Mr. Weissenberg´s veins combined to the taste of an upper class person, he plays Rachmaninoff as he ought to be played.

Exciting!!

[lolitaeviston]

I got to meet him. He's... intimidating...

This is so beautiful.

[DerekGuenther]

Blown. Away. For a while I was drifting away from Rachmaninoff, but... wow.

[Choltik]

For me, best piece from rachmaninoff!

Awesome!

[lolitaeviston]

@Choltik Mmm yes, but Rach 3???

[Choltik]

@lolitaeviston piece for piano solo! Rach 3 is legendary

[lolitaeviston]

@Choltik hahaha yes now we're in complete agreement.

[andresruval]

hey, I have Ashkenazy's and Horowitz's recordings, and I'm wondering if it's normal what they do, they kinda mix both versions of the sonata, the 1st and 2nd edition. Anybody has something to say about that? I like Horowitz's version more than Ashkenazy's and even the 1st and 2nd .

[lorditachijr]

@andresruval Many concert artists learn both versions and combine them to suit their tastes. This is usually done because the 1913 Edition is considered to be too thick and lengthy, but many also say (and I agree with this to an extent) that when Rach revised it, he took out all of the good stuff. I use the International edition that comes with both versions of the piece. This edition also has a complete description of what parts Horowitz used from each version.

[Choltik]

For me, this is sonata is one of the best pieces created by rachmaninoff

[PeacefulStrife]

Hmmmm, something seems wrong with this interpretation; would Rachmaninoff have liked to see his sonata played this fast?

[francescorasmus]

@PeacefulStrife I think he would. First of all, Rachmaninoff played many of his pieces faster than many else. And then, if this was not Rachmaninoff's idea, instead of correcting Weissenberg, he would ask him interested, why Weissenberg think it should be played in this way. Every pianist have had different experiences, and therefore they play it the way they feel. It is every composers idea, to have their music played in many different ways. And every performance is an interesting performance.

[japanesesweet]

@francescorasmus you're right. Any given piece of music can withstand a wide variety of interpratation and differing tempo. For me,Weissenberg works wonderfully well on its own terms.

[cedricrlongreen]

Oh yeah this is definitely a good example of Romanticism bordering 20th century

[rectalspike]

He really makes this a first-class "RUSH JOB!" What's the hurry, Alexis? Two recordings stick out in my mind as the best, and they are by Yves-Jean Thibaudet and Van Cliburn. They're both great, and both are sensitive and creative, but I'll give the sensitivity edge to Thibaudet.

[EmptyVee00000]

I'd say Van Cliburn and Vladimir Ashkenazy. Weissenberg's is too fast and too unclear.

[superstition2]

Too fast.

[lagerbaer]

I've a version of this with Helene Grimaud, it's amazing and I believe her tempi are better. Just my humble opinion.

[sanjosemike]

Incredible technique, typical of Weissenberg..but way too fast. It's like he wants to finish it ASAP. Brian Schembri has a youtube performance starting with the 2nd movement on a Fazioli Piano. I purchased the entire recording. Brian has all the technique, but it never gets in the way of the music. sanjosemike

[SarrasaniPianoCircus]

Pogorelich has the pen of the poet, here there is the hammer.....

[MahaloJack]

Wonderfull interpretation! Try also Zoltan Kocsis, he's superb!

[winkandrun]

I like this.

[Hervinbalfour]

I originally liked this interpretaion but I have grown to dislike it over time. Not that it's a bad performance but I'm not moved in the same way I was when I first heard this recording years ago and recently up until now. I also prefer the original 1913 version. I also enjoy Michael Ponti's live recording here on Youtube,

[lovesGenet]

Weissenberg is one of the most respected and a fabulous mind but I donot like this .Horowitz,VanCliburn and Collard sound more likethe histrionic Rach we are used to.This mans left hand is perfect .These clean textures make the music less interesting.Sultanov is a dream in this kind of music.Weissenberg is always different listen to his Scarlatti.He is interested in the big line,shwing shape and correspondence in rythm and soon.Maybethiswillcometome later i prefer Horo and VanCliburn in this.

[drcarlwainwright]

Weissenberg plays great, he gives this piece what it deserves.

There is energy, pianistic bravura and a few interesting harmonies. And that's about it. In my opinion (I don't want to play the troll here), no comparison to the better Scriabine sonatas, Ravel, later Prokoffiev Sonatas ... Rachmannonov will remain the guilty pleasure of classical music.

[japanesesweet]

Interesting to hear a less sympathetic view- i know where you`re coming from, but i like this unfussy approach which goes for the broad sweep. There are more detailed performances (eg. Kocsis)but i prefer Weissenberg`s in the end.

[marcohorowitz8]

there is so much more he could do musically and far less in terms of speed; inner voices, or upper ones he's not sounding, it's rushed and rather unmusical. The inspiration for this work was the church bells and the plain-chanting of the Orthodox Russian church; there's nothing mystical or inspirational about this recording. Certainly not the definitive recording

[japanesesweet]

I'm not sure that this recording is considered definitive ...what on earth does that mean anyway? I'm pretty sure i like it- -tremendous energy and sense of paragraph. I like the way the left hand figures are treated with equal importance...it gives a very chaotic,swirling effect.

[Hervinbalfour]

Definitive imo means an intepretation has set the standard by all others will be compared to.

[EdiEllerymissing]

To fast, to metronomical. There's no sense of direction, phrasing, etc. I know I'm talking about a great genius, but this is not Rachmaninoff, this is some weird classical, to exact. Where's the music in this? To much notes, to fast.

[Hervinbalfour]

I guess we are entitled to our opinions but this recording is considered to be definitive by many. Too fast? Well Rachmaninoff played all of his works faster than how most interpret his works today so I totaly disagree with you in regards to his choice of tempo.

[EdiEllerymissing]

You have to remember that when Rachmaninoff made all his recordings he use to play faster than he actually use to do it because the lenght of the old recordings where very short. We know that from his own words. Definitive? Acording to whom? Is not just about the speed, but his "exatitude". Allways on tempo, like he is playing Mozart. Listen to Van Cliburn record of this sonata. Much more "organic", more like Rachmaninoff use to play. Just my opinion, not a "definitive" absolute.

[Hervinbalfour]

I am going to have to disagree with you about the speed of his recordings. That whole idea about Rachmaninoff playing at the speed needed to for his recordings is now considered a myth. I have researched and others here on YT have. I you can show me where Rachmaninoff is qouted as saying that himself please let me know. As far as this recording being definitive read the reviews of this cd when it was originally released and it to this day it still receives critical acclaim.

[EdiEllerymissing]

There are letters about it. I don't know where you can find them, I just read it in a magazine named Pauta in México. It's a serious musical investigation magazine, probably the best in México. Definitive? Said who? As far as I know, there are no definiives in music, but people always come claiming "this is the best". I said: I know I'm talking about a great genius, but I don't like this recording. This doesn't sound like Rachmaninoff to me, principaly because is to metronomical...

[Hervinbalfour]

Again I stated that there are numerous reviews by MUSIC CRITICS (not me) defining this recording as such. I also have read many articles that have also stated that was not true and provided just as much evidence that that wasn't the case. But I'm not here to debate about that. We all have our opinions about a persons artistry. I don't see this interpretation as metronomical or too fast. Its no longer my favoroite interpretation but it's still one of the best.

[JanesStyle]

I'm not normally a fan of Weissenberg, even though he's a great player. But I LOVE his interpretation of this piece...so much energy!

[nextren]

Rachmaninoff wrote the original version of his Second Sonata in 1913. In 1931, he thought it was too long and revised it. This is the version Weissenberg plays. Horowitz asked Rachmaninoff if he could tinker with it in 1940, Rachmaninoff said yes, so Horowitz continued tinkering with it through 1980. I prefer Rachmaninoff's versions of his own music.

[Hervinbalfour]

It is so interesting that Rachmaninoff is considered one of the greatest composers/pianists of all time. Yet, he was so insecure when it came to his talent. The original version is superior imo. And like you I prefer Rachmaninoff's own versions.

[morvensky]

IS this the original, revised or Horowitz version?

[superstition222]

It's definitely not the original. I think it's the Rachmaninov revision.

[GregLile]

Rachmaninoff 1931

[Ellinidara]

Superb Weissemberg legend,like others incredibles pianists

[Daartan]

Weissenberg always sounds in control, everything planned ahead note by note.

Top notch :)

[billyguns2]

The more I hear Weissenberg the more I am convinced that he is one of the greatest pianists of all time. This is stupendously beautiful; I LOVE this music!

[tenyrsgone]

Oh, my FUC*&^$ GOD this is beautiful.

[vova47]

Thank you for sharing!I completely agree with your statement that Bach,Chopin,Rachmaninoff

and for me most definitely Bill Evans are the very best things (there are few others,but we forget about them for the moment)that have happened to music.Keep posting,peace,V.

[aryanpianist]

I can just say : He is a Pianist .

[rareviolintreasures]

id say he is more than a pianist but an artist

[iedsri]

Is there any chance that you might be able to post the 1st Sonata too?

[rareviolintreasures]

done - posted as a video response

[Brianjonestown]

Great post! Weissenberg was only recently eclipsed in the Rach 2nd Sonata by Pogorelich, who's been touring it in the past year. Pogo's version is like heaven and hell crashing together, just astounding.

[Sinfoniette]

Haha, if Pogo's rendition is heaven and hell crashing together, what about Horowitz's?

[Brianjonestown]

You tell me, kid. Just how IS Horowitz's?

[Sinfoniette]

I think you'll have to go listen it yourself. :)

[Brianjonestown]

Already did -- otherwise I wouldn't have posted about Pogo. :)

[Sinfoniette]

Pogo is known for his different renditions, which...frankly to me, is either a hit or miss to me. I dismissed his Rach 2nd and didn't pay too much attention, I suppose. But sometimes they end up being the greatest.

[Brianjonestown]

All very true

[timmymacdd]

I have been trying to find horowitz's piano score for this piece.....I can't seem to find the version horowitz played and the one that is circulated most is nothing like it. It takes out about 1/3 of the notes. 20 years I have been looking, This version is actually the damn only and pretty darn close to horowitz's version and it is recorded beter by far.

[iedsri]

Thanks very much for posting this recording! I had not known that Weissenberg recorded the sonatas. Fantastic, fascinating interpretation -- quite unlike any of the better known readings, particularly the tempo of II, but not "wrong" -- "non allegro" can mean a lot of things after all!