Added: 5 years ago
From: googooeugene
Views: 103,075
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (89)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I wish he recorded all of the Etudes-Tableaux. He plays them so well.

  • @MrStrav81 I've got a recording of the Op. 33 ones, I dunno if he did Op. 39, though :(

  • Charm.

    Душа трепещет и возвышается, чувствует присутствие Бога и Учителя.

  • What a giant Slava was. And to think that this was his "period of decline"???? If only we could all be so lucky. Nice post!

  • what is this? rachmaninov what?

    I want to learn this

  • @scout6686 this is etude tableux op.33 no.5 Rachmaninov e flat minor

  • frikkin sweet thanks so much

  • richter's gotta be one of the most masculine pianists. his work has a lot of heroic charisma.

  • @scout6686 Ha yes ironic isn't it?

  • the man is badass

  • А почему Метель начинается с кульминации?

  • this ain't no 5

    etude tableaux op 33 no 5 is in d minor!!! and it's written all over YT as no 4, but no 4 was never published...so this CAN'T be no 5

  • I do. Do you have a problem with that?

  • Why so stingy? Why not give us the entire performance?

  • I love Richter!!!

  • It seems like the best interpretations of the Romance composers (minus Beethoven - Brendel is the master of him) and even later virtuoso pieces all come from either: 1. Cziffra, 2. Richter, or 3.Hofmann (possibly the greatest since Liszt himself, not enough recordings to determine though). All the other greats lack at least one of the following necessities: speed, power, clarity, emotion, rubato mastery, or relative creativity.

  • How many other greats are you disregarding?

    Cziffra is good at Liszt, but his other stuff (Chopin) is not ultra enlightening. Richter is an all-rounder, astounding at Rachmaninoff, but you can't call him the best at Romantic. Hofmann is just in another class - the "Romantic"/"Modern".

    And Brendel is not the undisputed master of Beethoven, there's a lot more pianists than just him.

    I don't think you have been listening to variety, really.

  • where's the beginning? this is be far the best version that I've heard!

  • there is no better pianist to translate rachmaninoff than richter. he catches rachmaninoff´s interpretation and intentions so well, just amazing. like volodos is an amazing liszt-player, richter was rachmaninoff. wonderful. I especially like him playing op.32 no.10, it is just stunning.

  • I love Richterrrrrr!!!

  • the greatest pianist ever!!!!!

  • (First: pardon my english) Richter is in my opinion simply the best. His analytical approach adds to the emotional experience for intelligent people, as I see it. Romantic music does particularly not need an over-emotional interpretation. A piece of music is allways greater than the composer, and Richter plays Rach. better than Rach. does himself, I think.

  • Allegedly Rachmaninov himself said that Richter played his stuff better than he did.

  • Damn, he said the same of Horowitz too. One would swear Rachmaninov liked anyone else's performance of his music except himself :)

  • your english is great, what are u telling us ? !

  • @StudiosusPerpetuus: I agree. While Rach was undeniably one of The Greatest Pianists, he often sounded bored when performing his own work. Richter & Horowitz are among the best.....alongwith, in my opinion, Weissenberg & Janis

  • @StudiosusPerpetuus Pretentious bastard. Huge overstatement aswell.

  • Its cool to compare this with horowitz's

    \

  • For this particular masterwork, I keep Richter's version as my favorite one. It's really amazing the way Richter connects every single note between each other, leading the sound of that beautiful armonic structure to the top of it with a constant crescendo, at the last moment he makes this incredible diminuendo, so the effect of sound is simply marvelous. That fine touch at the end of it, really sintetizes the whole Rach's idea making a lot of sense on the way he plays it. Beautiful indeed.

  • yes, pray for him

  • Rachmaninov OP 33-6

  • We must pray for the mental recovery of Smithsherman, who is obviously suffering from cranial vacuity, probably brought about by some degenerative disease that seemingly has affected his thought process and perception. Only love and prayer on your part will bring him back to sanity.

  • sorry man, but prayer doesn't work. but i hope he gets better. :]

  • ShmitS most be recovering now from one of those epic and narcissisist D'artagnan-style battles against his... own mirror. It's hard to say RRO but there are some people who won't recover their mental sanity even if you pray day and night for your life time.

    In the land of blinds "one eyed is king". ShimtS's leading company is going to be soon declared: "chapter 11"

  • No, here I must respectfully disagree with my eminent colleague SmithSherman: Rather, Richter made his peers appear as acolytes, much as Wagner, Mendelsohn and Schumann humbly encouraged such nascent geniuses as Lutoslawski, Ruggles and Gurney

  • That was STUPID comment...

  • I was referring to coaster1000 comment about "NEVER record or perform solo music, with sheets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

  • thank you this guy doesnt have a single clue

  • As Richter aged it is my understanding that his perception of pitch was altered. As many artists rely on absolute pitch, being without this special skill required his use of the sheet music as a back-up just in case he needed a reminder.

  • Common psych knowledge says that everyone's pitch perception changes as they age. Fascinating information out there suggest that older people with perfect pitch become frustrated as their perceptions no longer match reality, although in that last regard the only evidence I have heard is anecdotal.

  • :-OOO

  • Maestro Richter moves around quite a bit on the stool but what incredible sounnd. Rich, imaginative, powerful, lyrical, overwhelming, amazing. Someone said " .. he's playing like Horowitz". He isn't, it's Richter 100%, always under control, unlike Horowitz.

  • 20regards: you are correct. Richter's health (gradual heart failure) and general nervous system took a toll in his last ten years. He lost his pitch by as much as a whole step & decided to use the score. Regardless, he made every pianist look like a student and the honest ones admitted it publicly.

  • What does it mean, "lost his pitch by as much as a whole step"? Do you mean that he heard everything a whole step lower than it actually sounded? That would be very odd, indeed! I've never heard of such a problem. If someone loses their perfect pitch, it would actually make it EASIER for them to play a piano that is tuned to a different frequency, because they wouldn't be aware or annoyed by the pitch variance. That's a drawback to having perfect pitch.

  • His pitch faltered as he got older. It happens to a lot of people with perfect pitch. It's true that there are a few drawbacks, but I bet you wouldn't look at it from an advantageous standpoint having been used to it for an entire career. It's happening to me right now and believe me, it can be a devastating loss.

  • It is said that as you get older, you tend to identify notes a half step lower.

  • He's playing like Horowitz yeaahhh=)))

  • richter is dead my friend he died in 1995

  • 1997

  • richter where do you live? there is a piano teacher in my town with the last name of richter. please respond

  • lolz

  • The only way you're going to get in contact with him is though a medium... lol

  • Glorious. I wish only that you had a hundred more. Thanks

  • where's the beginning? you cut half the etude!

  • just for the record: this is not a regular recording of SR. This is a piano roll machine on which the composer recorded various pieces, this machine can convey only partly the true artistry of this giant.

  • oops this comment was supposed to go on  another video, sorry!

  • Also Bartòk used to play with the score...but Richter is Richter

  • i was told that when he was getting older he went blank on stage and just forgot the notes he was supposed to play. after that he began using sheet music... in concert!

  • Apparently, others are doing the same, e.g. Pogorelich.

    It's a good idea actually, as it removes the stress related to memorization, which has nothing to do with music-making anyway.

  • Really? I saw Pogorelich several times (with hair and without, hehehe) and I never saw him using the score.

  • Most recently, that's what I read in a review. I was not there however, so I could be wrong.

  • i saw Pogorelich a while ago, and he didn't use the score, and it was beautiful, but I just saw him last december, and it was aweful playing with the score. I think he is going crazy. He was talking to his page turner the whole concert. yeah. it was pretty bad.

  • awful in what sense? musically? bcs technically I think he can still play anything he wants.

  • The reviews of Pogorelich's recent live performances were universally very negative, I'm sure you can find several online via google.

  • I remember reading the NY Times review for Pogorelich's October 2006 recital at the Metropolitan Museum, and I believe the end of the review read something like, "an immense talent gone tragically astray."

    He supposedly played the second movement of Beethoven's Sonata No. 32 at a ridiculously slow tempo, making the piece last 41 minutes. I have a more standard rendition on CD, performed by Friedrich Gulda, and it lasts just under 25 minutes.

  • i beg to differ...

    i've found that when the music has been removed, I play much more expressively than with sheet music...

    maybe that's just me

  • I know I am responding to an old post, but you are correct! Supposedly, the trend of playing without music began with Clara Wieck, who had bad eyesight. It apparently caught on after she decided to memorize her recitals.

    Damn you Clara Wieck and your eyes!

  • I know this is a late response but I have to laugh because i am with you man! lmao

  • @AChrisL i thought it was liszt in his performances?

  • @afertyus1000 You may very well be correct! I am not sure...I may have to do some research...

  • A truly wonderful pianist.

  • He also believed that playing with the score brought him closer to the composer's intentions.Matter of paying respect as well,I believe.

  • He always performed without the music given his incredible memory.But some concert he had a blackout in the Liszt Sonata,wich never happened before.From then on always with the music.

  • do you reckon he actually needs the music?

  • He had an accident after which he ould not remember music properly. I heard him in Milano starting Beethoven's Appassionata in the wrong tonality and kept on sort of transposing everything until he reached the descending broken chords, where he realized that he was in deep trouble.. After some accidents of this sort, he decided to read.Apparently he was also an incredible first sight reader and could read and immediately play just about anything!

  • That is total bs.

  • I was there man, no bs!

  • Richter stopped playing the Appassionata after the 1960 season. He started using the score in the late 1970s, and only resumed playing the Appassionata in 1992 (by which point he had been using the score for at least 15 years), so your story can't possibly be accurate.

  • Richter's my dad

  • you heard him live?? if so i really envy you. and appreciate the information.

  • In the book that Bruno Monsaingeon compiled, Richter told that at the end of his life, he had lost his perfect pitch and while he was playing in h moll, he heard it in a minor and started to transpose for correction and then landed in g moll; that also distorded totally the physical playing for someone that play by ear... After a disastrous Liszt concert in Meslay and op.106 in Japan, he decided to play with the score.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more