Sviatoslav Richter plays Bach Italian Concerto BWV 971 (1/2)

[LvJie1998]

I LOVE RICHTER.

[paganviodio]

well...this surely not true tosay that richter didnt care of Bach. Richter studied in Moscow, and in Moscow if you don´t play good Bach...you´re somenthing like...Nothing... you play good Bach, and then you play the other... Because in Bach is the Polyphony, which is to hear at best by piano. a Moscowian pianist without caring, playing Bach good, is a kind of illusion. this was a studied man of this legendary Moscow Tschaikovsky Cons... I mean come on...

[cuallito]

I know! I'll write a concerto for each of the major countries in Europe!

Because I'm Bach, and I'm CRAZY!!!!

[nikkitytom]

With all due respect, I don't like this interpretation. I get the feeling of being rushed inexorably forward. No sense of a "breath" between sections. This is a wonderful piece of music ... and in transferring it to piano, I feel we keep it alive by utilizing some of the assets of the piano over the clavichord or harpsichord. I don't get the feeling that Mr. Richter is enjoying the act of playing it. "Work without regard for the fruit of your labors"  ( The Bhagavad Gita). For sheer joy.

[harisiadis]

Is it OK to appreciate BOTH Richter's and Gould's interpretations? 

;)

[paganviodio]

well this is sure better than the one of glenn gould´s just because of the fact that, glenn gould plays glenn gould, you don´t have the impression of listening bach there, but gould....here, he really tries to put himself back between the composer and the piano.... all the phrases he plays are formulated right.the tempo is great, the contrapunctial lines are very well followed.... one just should wash the ears from the sound of glenn gould, then you´d understand what im talking about.

[Nijmegen1955]

Beautiful !

But (may I say it ?) give me Glenn Gould

[francorussie2]

Gould is great in some way that does not sound enough like Bach and his time.

Richter does a great job, he's brilliant (as a musician and as a person, both) but even he is at times a tiny bit toe "warm" to my taste with Bach, however, I do not think we can deny Gould is even farther away from Bach, his human traits and his time

[claire13ear]

nice but just a touch too fast for my liking..:-)

[Terrdemarzielle]

I think it really boils down to the fact that Richter didn't care for Bach to the extent that Gould did. I also feel Gould spent more time associating with the baroque mindset, despite the fact that, out of choice, he ignores many (not all) of the principles that go along with that mindset for the sake of his highly valued individualistic interpretation.

[truecrypt]

No, it doesn't boil down to "who cared more for Bach". The point is that both approaches are valid and unique. One can prefer Gould, Richter, Landowska, Yudina or Feinberg... The question is "what (or whom) do you like more" and not "who plays better". At this level the question of "playing better" doesn't exist.

[Terrdemarzielle]

I wasn't trying to suggest that Gould has a better/more valuable interpretation than Richter, but now I read my post again it does certainly seem that way. I was rather unskillfully trying to offer an explanation behind the choices of those who prefer Gould to Richter (when it comes to Bach.)

[japanesesweet]

@truecrypt I agree with you-it's totally irrelevant at this level,the question of "who plays better"

[Upl0Admax]

@truecrypt very well stated

[roommaster]

@Terrdemarzielle: How is it, that you guys always talk about the pianists of such pieces and never about the work of composers? In my opinion, it is actually Bach, who deserves as much recognition, as most people are giving interpreters like Argerich, Richter and Gould....

[Terrdemarzielle]

@roommaster We discuss interpretations of music because they can be compared to one another, in the sense that different musicians feel and express exactly the same piece in very different and unique ways. The music itself, composed by Bach, has no comparison as it is one of a kind.

[Terrdemarzielle]

As for recognition, I personally argue that Bach was the greatest musician of all time (there are many, even those who do not particularly enjoy his music that acknowledge this) and this particular piece is undoubtedly one of his many masterpieces although it is not among my favourites.

[paganviodio]

@Terrdemarzielle oh he did. he played bach always. and he played it always very well. one could just say he wasnt that "one sided" as glenn gould. he played everything. today, the wohltemperiertes klavier recording of richter, is in many points better one, than the gould version. he plays the whole contrapunctial work out. everything what richter does in Bach , has a concept and he follows this concept. gould plays the same charakters diffirent, in the very same work, richter wouldnt do such.

[yenrabaraho]

@Terrdemarzielle

Richter indeed cared for Bach, this is a beautiful performance, as is Gould's. My favourite is Karl Richter on a cembalo. This recording is superb though.

[yenrabaraho]

@Terrdemarzielle

Richter indeed cared for Bach, this is a beautiful performance, as is Gould's. My favourite is Karl Richter on a cembalo. This recording is superb though. I'ld like to add that Ricther's b minor prelude and fugue from bk1 of the WTC will address your concern as to whether he "cared" for Bach or not.

[bachkwt]

i know this is amazing but I think glenn gould is better when it comes to bach

[CeaserXIX]

I love it, I just love this interpretation.

[scout6686]

not big fan of richter on the bach.

Richter is best with Rachmaninov, Schumann, abstract euro/russian lineage.

His specialty.

his expertise in not in precise but rather precision with strong charisma.

If you want Bach much prefer Glenn Gould.

[truecrypt]

@scout6686

What do you mean by "abstract euro/russian lineage"?

Even if you prefer Gould, it doesn't make Richter's interpretation less valuable to other people.

[scout6686]

Technically it does. If his specialty is in something else and Glenn Gould in Bach, then on anything measurable his interpretation is more 'valuable' because he spent less time/less overall dedication to produce it.

We could argue that my interpretation of this piece (which I can play) is just as valuable as Sviatoslav but that wouldn't be true either. His experience (all human capital) makes his quality and output of higher 'value' than mine. The same goes for Gould vs. Richter for Bach.

.

[truecrypt]

@scout6686

You didn't answer my question: what is "abstract euro/russian lineage"?

Specializing in a single composer doesn't necessarily make one's performance "more valuable".

As for value, you're right and wrong. Both Richter's and Gould's performances do have a great value - not better/worse, but both uniquely valuable. I wouldn't include your performance in this equation though ;)

[scout6686]

wow man that's below the belt.

[dolofonos]

@truecrypt How convenient and safe is the answer which assumes two things to be compared are of equal value. Is this a discussion of truth or of whose opinion is most polite?

[truecrypt]

@dolofonos

How convenient is to twist someone's words in sake of who knows what?

I don't compare "equal" but talk about UNIQUE values. We can try to compare, analyse, criticize, argue... but the truth is that all those great musicians are unique. And yes, I prefer polite discussion to rude and often uneducated guesses and personal insults.

[yglofmi]

@truecrypt concordo, a interpretação de Richter é muito boa, o problema é que do ponto de vista estilístico está muito longe de Bach, o que não quer dizer que eu prefira Gould, que eu acho que também não é perfeito em termos de estilo. Salve.

[klinsha8]

Great, great, Sviatoslav. He and G.Gould I've heard during all my life.

THANKS

[boomaga]

He's rushing, he's using the damper,... and I swear in the first section and the da capo I hear him holding the sustain, too.

[JAYASEKERA]

So what?

[KazKylheku]

Yeah, it sounds like a Scarlatti piece played by a fan of Beethoven.

[rufusistmeinhund]

Great Richter, tks for the upload, yet Artur Schnabel is quite hard to beat :).

[mltube]

Of course Schnubel is hard to beat, rufus. One needs to exhume his corpse first, and this is against the law.

[francescaemc2]

Sviatoslav shreds.

[PunisaRachich]

glenn did this one better but he is not generally better than richter

[morvensky]

They play a lot of different repertoire and they are very different pianists so they are hard to compare. I generally prefer Gould for Baroque and modern whilst I prefer Richter for Classical and Romantic but I like them equally for Beethoven and Haydn.

[andre2av2]

Hmm, i did not like this one, way to fast and to rubato for my taste! Glenn Goulds is much better :) and the pedal use sounded strange

[truecrypt]

Probably Richter's understanding of Bach, rubato and how to use pedal is not up to your very demanding taste.

[jabsomdoc]

and richter admitted as such! richter's favorite pianist was glenn gould.

[morvensky]

Really? I know Gould's favorite pianist was Richter.

[polymath7]

I freely admit to being a musical know-nothing, but I was under the impression that Tureck was the only Bach pianist he really respected.

[adams82683]

Gould said that Tureck was the only pianist who influenced him, at least for Bach. He also was inspired a lot by Schnabel. He generally didn't say much regarding his thoughts and feelings about other pianists, the notable exception being Horowitz, whom he seemed to hold in flat out contempt. (I just realized by the way I may have misinterpreted your post - did you mean that you were under the impression that Tureck was the only Bach pianist Richter or Gould respected?)

[polymath7]

Oh, I apologize for the ambiguity; yes I meant Gould.

I don't suppose you could spare a moment to tell me what he had against Horrowitz -or better yet refer me to a source?

Thanks.

[adams82683]

That's a somewhat difficutl question to answer. If you're looking for a source there are excellent biographies by Peter Ostwald and Otto Freiderich. From a purely musical/pianist standpoint, I suspect that Horowitz represented everything Gould hated in music - he was flashy, show-offy, played all sorts of music Gould hated, etc. He also said Horowitz faked a lot. I also suspect that there may have been some jealousy of Horowitz's immense popularity. Anyway. no problem.

[faraz1729]

Apparently as a response to talk of Horowitz technique and virtuosity, Gould said "I can draw circles around him" and went on to transcribe and record on video Ravel's La Valse, even though he had no interest in the piece or in Ravel's music at all.

I can't give you a verified source for that (I have been trying to find one myself), but it comes from someone citing a mutual friend of Gould's.

[polymath7]

Ah, thanks, :-)

Assuming the quote is accurate, I wonder how many pianists would accept Gould's self-assessment, as regards his performance that particular piece.

[faraz1729]

I personally don't see how one could rank the technical proficiencies of the two at that level of mastery.

[polymath7]

(chuckle) Unless the quote is apocryphal, Gould certainly seems to have thought otherwise. "I can draw circles around him" is hardly an equivocal declaration. But I see what you mean; it's too close to call.

I't's certainly too close for *me* to call -my expertise lies elsewhere.

Ask me whether Velasquez or Sargent has the more facile brushwork, and I might have something worthwhile to say.

[polymath7]

I see you're a director.

Just out of curiosity, I don't suppose there's an outside chance you had anything to do with 'Thirty-Two Short Films About Glenn Gould'?

It was this this film that introdoced me to Gould's work (and, incidentally, the Italian concerto is the very first piece by Bach I ever listened to, at the age of seventeen).

[faraz1729]

I'm not a director. That's just the type of account I chose, because back then YouTube would allow director accounts to upload videos longer than 10 minutes.

I certainly didn't have anything to do with 32SFAGG, though I've always felt my deceptively old grizzled looks and captivating baritone voice would have brought a lot to the role of the trucker in the Truck Stop scene.

[enerjazzer]

Gould's playing sounds pretty much like harpsichord (you can find the harpsichord record ad compare), but Richter's version is very pianistic.

I don't think making piano sound like harpsichord is the ultimate goal for harpsichord music on piano.

[chad410]

never did enjoy the way he played this. but this doesn t sound the same rec. :?

[4444matthew4444]

this is the italian concerto

[gerryrains]

This is simply beautiful! Both pianist and composers get five stars. The grand piano, however, most certainly does not get five stars. The overwhelming bass in the opening passages is nothing that Bach ever heard or envisioned. This performance would sound much better if played on harpsichord or early fortepiano. Only then could we truly hear what Bach heard as he composed. Still - five stars!

[pianopera]

Hello Truecrypt,

This is not the Capriccio but the Italian Concerto BWV 971!

[truecrypt]

Of course it is! When filling out the info form on YT the name of the piece is automatically appears. So, my previous upload name "kicked in"! ;) thanks for alarming me!

[pianopera]

Great performance though...

[bafr1]

this deserves 5***** , cool