In the day when Heifetz played this version, it was considered virtually unplayable. Now all the little wunderkinder virtuosi play it virtually note-perfect.. But none of their performances are in the same light cone as Heifetz. I remember when I was a kid listening to his recording of this piece on 78's, of which I wore out several.From the point of view of technical glitz, expressive warmth, pacing and just general overall great playing of music of this genre, it just doesn't get any better.
I had a friend years ago from Russia, a fine violinist. He told me one could practice for 60 years and still not be as good as Heifetz. Well, when I listen to this Waxman, I feel that I must agree with my Russian friend.
Waxman and Carmen are both performed with orchestras just look at shaham or chang. Pianos are just an orchestral substitute for small performances. Waxman is more challenging, but many feel it is less melodic and more showy, so it is recorded less.
@khira07 You are correct, the original opera was composed by Bizet. Sarasate and Waxman wrote renditions for the violin. This Waxman version is considered to be more challenging and therefore less recorded. Also, the Sarasate version is often played with piano accompianament (Joshua Bell recorded one) while I've only heard Waxman with an orchestra.
@aimson I thought that the reason that the Waxman one is less performed was because it is so much more difficult to get the score. I've heard that the Sarasate one was more difficult... I'm just curious which one it is.
@aimson on the contrary, i've never heard the sarasate performed on the piano, wheras a friend of mine just performed the waxman with a piano accompaniment
Heifetz belongs to a golden age of music makers- see the schmaltzy movie Carnegie Hall where many musicians were featured in small excerpts the acting and story lines are risible. But the music makers are captured well and we can still see these great artists play or sing again. Of course Heifetz was phenomenal. His Beethoven and Brahms Concertos; along with many others are yardsticks from which others are still compared ...But there IS! no one performance -that is what is so interesting
Listen to other recordings of the Waxman or Sarasate fantasies and come back to this one - it is accomplished with an ease that is beyond belief. The Kogan is wondrous. Vengerov is terrific. The great recordings of the Sarasate by Anne Sophie Mutter, Gil Shaham and others. But Heifetz has shown himself to be in a class of his own.
Sarasate performed Carmen Fantasy in 1883 based on Bizet's opera while Waxman adapted Sarasate's work much later for film in about 1946. In turn, Sarasate's music which very popular in Spain t the time most likely influenced Bizet's Carmen.
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the difference between Waxman and Sarasate's Carmen Fantasies? Sorry to ask but otherwise i'd remain ignorant... Both are based on the original Carmen by Bizet?
I'm playing the Waxman right now. It's definitely a lot harder than the Sarasate. There is also a third version by Hubay, which is much more lyrical than the Waxman or Sarasate.
Unfortunately, I can't seem to find a recording anywhere of the Hubay version, so I cannot tell you which version I prefer of the three. However, while Waxman is definitely the more virtuosic showpiece, with a lot more flash, the Sarasate version imo is more representative of the opera, with many more variations.
well........ i saw level repertoire from a violin masterclass website, and it wrote level 9, which is "mastery of all techniques" but level ten is " Crazy stuff , virtuosos only".............
I know which website you are talking about. It says "level 9" there, but they aren't talking about this piece. They were referring to the Sarasate Carmen Fantasy (which is already very difficult). This is the Waxman version, which is much harder. This is easily level 10 on that scale. I would rather play some of the Paganini caprice than this.
@AlexanderWung how about you go learn this? then get back to me when you do. Oh, then play it with the Berliner Philharmoniker and play "more accurate" than Heifetz. :)
To work how you said, possible only you will be Genius or Crazy. -) btw he was played every day 24 skill's all. some of my teacher's saw him and was some his friend.
Magic, passionate, emotionally daring, windswept and full, unlike any violinist before, after and maybe ever to ever be. With a lightness of touch and tone and speed soaring and dancing through the spectacular the neuromechanism of his (Heifitz's) brain.
put it this way, John Waxman is not a pleasant man to deal with, I'd go so far to say he was a jerk. But its considered the most difficult violin piece ever written, so most dont try to get the music. He still owns the copyright so noone else can publish it.
actually, it is :D its been officially confirmed by guiness, not that they would post it in their record books but most violinists agreed, so its semi unofficial. its ARGUABLY the hardest and i must say, i found it alot more challanging to play than the wieniawski, prokofiev, mendelssohn or even tchaikovsky concertos.
Saying something is the hardest piece is a bit silly. For whom is it hard? If someone is really good at technique but not naturally musical, then Mozart could be the hardest, though a good 13 year-old can play most of the notes of anything by Mozart.
Yes, I accept with you it's not harder than 1st Wieniawski but here speaking not about hard or easy It's just one of the most beautiful music. I did 1st Wieniawski and Waxman there are different and every one has some speciality dfficult's. only wieniawski 3rd movement finale you can practise more than one or two years to play it good. In Waxman has composer but his one this peace made him Popular on the world.
To violinspaz: you didn't say Paganini, Paganini wrote many hard songs than Wieniawski, Prokofiev, Mendelssohn, and Tchaikovsky. and his concerto is somewhat harder than this IMO only though.........
Heifetz was the best of his generation. He cannot be compared (in my opinion) to Hilary Hahn or Itzhak Perlman. Heifetz's best performance is the Introduction & Rondo Cappricioso concert in this movie with those orphans... I can't remember what it's called...
oh i dont know, he was perfect in technique but the 1900's had a hell of a lot of brilliant musicians and they were good in different areas, Isaac stern, yehudi menuhin, oistrak, heifetz, all were good in different areas, for heifetz it was definitely technique
Dear IsaacDelarge--you have no reason to apologize for anything. You are clearly a sensitive, thinking person who can't fathom silly, ignorant or dangerous remarks. Leave it alone my friend. They're all over YouTube.
Enjoy Heifetz and rest assured that there are generations and generations that agree with you.
This is how one can express his powerful emotions through pure music rather than his body language.
It always seemed to me that when a performer lacks the pure skills of performing his instrument, hed use his body language to fill in the blanks. Heifetz never needed any body language, there was simply no blank spots... There is not a single violinist in the world who wouldnt envy Heiftez's superb performance power
in 1998, a boy named zelda was beaten to death by a bunch of bullys who taunted and made fun of him because his name was based of a video game title. days later, he killed those bullys by setting their rooms on fire. don't close the marked as spam box now! post this comment onto 10 videos in the next 15 minutes or else zelda will come to your room on the nearest tuesday night and kill you by setting your room in a blaze.
I'm sorry, but Heifetz's stature FAR outweighs that of Kogan's. Ask Perlman, Stern, Milstein, Oistrakh, even Kogan himself and they'll tell you the same thing: that Heifetz was by far greatest amongst them.
To understand why this is, you have to be able to listen beyond the basics (clarity, intonation, etc.) and get into things like manipulation of intonation, width of vibrato, diversity of bow speed, etc.
One can prefer Kogan over Heifetz as a musician, but not as a violinist.
When asked to say a few words about Heifetz, Oistrakh replied, "There are many good violinists, then there is Heifetz." When asked to name the greatest violinist in the world, Kogan said, "Heifetz. He is no doubt the emperor." Stern said, "When the books are closed on this century, this will be known as the Century of Heifetz."
These are direct quotes. You obviously don't know shit about violin. Do yourself a favor and don't talk about things you don't understand.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Hahaha!!!What an immature shithead you are!What did you expect,retarded asshole,to say that Heifetz is no good and that they are the best of the best?They respected him for being a pioneer and that's all.
"They respected him for being a pioneer and that's all."
How the fuck do you know that? I've given you quotes and direct evidence. You've offered nothing but unfounded opinions and ignorant conjectures. And now you've resorted to name-calling. Tell-tale sign of someone who knows he's got no argument.
And did you actually read the quotes? These are legendary violinists in their own rights with huge egos, who willingly admit that Heifetz is the greatest amongst them. They wouldn't have said these things if it weren't true. They haven't said these things about any other 20th century violinist.
This isn't 'Heifetz-worship,' this is fact. And so far you've offered nothing to disprove this fact.
Huge egos??If they had a drop of ego inside them they would have left USSR because of the humiliations and constant control over them.They where humble men,much more humble than you or me and they just wanted to play music. They had no problem saying that Heifetz was a great violinist,even that he is the greatest among them.Just out of respect for a pioneer who was older and the first in the line of violin virtuosos of the 20th century.
Look, I apologize if I came across that way. You are certainly entitled to your opinions, however wrong and unfounded they may be.
This has nothing to do with you or I, and everything to do with Heifetz. When you say that he plays with no distinct characteristic outside of "speed" and that he is famous because he spent his life outside the USSR, you are just plain wrong. I've offered you specific evidence disproving your assumptions, none of which you've addressed.
I said countless times that he was a pioneer at his time and that he is the first in a line of virtuosos of the 20th century.Because playing at such speed flawlessly was unbelievable at his time and continues to be nowadays.But his sound was never up to his speed.
Also,you did not offer any real proof.Some statements only from masters like Oistrakh or Kogan who appreciated heifetz's achievements and respected him.Their technique was equal to Heifetz's and personally I think that Kogan was even better,having concentrated in purely virtuoso repertoire.
"Also,you did not offer any real proof.Some statements only from masters like Oistrakh or Kogan"
LOL, how is that not proof? Oistrakh agrees w/me, Kogan agrees w/me, so do Stern, Perlman, Kreisler, etc...and that's NOT proof? Do you know better than they do?
"Their technique was equal to Heifetz"
Almost all violinists would disagree. If you really believe that Heifetz was known only for his speed, then I am sincerely sorry for you because you aren't hearing what everyone else is hearing.
Which one is better is truly up to musical taste. Notice how i said MUSICAL TASTE. At their level, nobody cares about what you said unless it has a musical purpose. We are musicians, not technicians, nor music theorists. Your last statement just shows that you belong to the latter. As yo-yo ma once wisely said "I am first a human being, second a musician, and third a cellist"
I'm pretty sure Perlman, Stern, Milstein, Oistrakh, Kogan and Heifetz etc etc have all mastered "things like manipulation of intonation, width of vibrato, diversity of bow speed, etc. ".
It comes down to personal preference, in general I find Kogan's surgically brutal playing more interesting to listen to than Heifetz heavily romantic wafting laced with brilliance.
You shouldn't say violinist x is better than violinist y, at this level, it's just disrespectful.
Yeah,he's right,I just closed the phone in Kogan's face!What a prick,he made me mad insisting Heifetz is a better violinist than him!Same shit with Oistrakh...No pride at all,he was like "Heifetz is my master!I'm nothing compared to him!I want to kiss his feet!He's my messiah!"
both truly great violinists, both with mind shattering techniques (as a fiddle player I can appreciate that!!) after that is said personal preferences come sharply into play. But I agree with FERViolin2010....you really can't say that Heifetz is the best.....he is just hefietz!!
props to Waxman, thank goodness for an actual quality use of Carmen. As for this version, after hearing Heifetz' version, all the others just sound wrong.
I've heard Perlman, Midori, Venergrov, et al, and still think the Heifetz recording of the Carmen Fantasy is the best. Such passion. Of course it's edited for him, with some added parts, but who cares?! I speak as a clarinetist, who has learned much from violinists. They sing, and I try to, also.
I'm simply astonished to see all the comments about " who is the best violinist. WHO CARES? There's absolutely no point arguing, beacause noone can ever have the best recording of every piece and we tend to have opinions about players, not definite sentences. The best thing about violinists is the variety, you have at least a few hundred people worth listening to, probably many more including quite a bit of simple college students, who have their one favourite piece they play like noone else...
Nowadays, as long as you can play any instrument, people(Unmusically educated) say you're good at the instrument, I find that rather stupid... this can only encourage people to stay at a low level since people saying a low level skills is good(clearly not).... Which means, great instrumentalist unlikely to exist anymore... I wonder why.....
I and by chiming in that sentiment, you imply that Jascha Heifetz isn't one of the most beautiful violinists in his time? I find that rather surprising, but it seems you may have drawn that conclusion from the fact this is a more stereotypical piece, so his theories might not shine through in spite of the familiar melody. If you were to listen to Jascha play Tchaikovsky's Serenade Melancolique you might draw the conclusion that he is an artist, but it's you'r choice.
oh, sorry. I thought you were saying that Jascha was just another violinist because this a common and fairly technical piece. Have you heard him do the Serenade Melancolique before, though? He's my favorite interpreter of it.
Wow the violin sounds better than the voice! Sometimes those ladies sound like they're going to explode. Dont get me wrong i like opera but this sounds way better than a lady to me.
he plays very differently than most of our musicians nowadays. i don't see why he cannot be admired as one of our best violinists in the world. i intend to play, like many others, differently than the sheet music. i have my own style, and so does he. though if you'd like to say "perfect", listen to Gil Shaham's carmen fantasy (first part). he follows the score; however it is a little different.
I may be misunderstanding you, but Gil Shaham's Carmen is different because it's a different piece of music. Sarasate rather than Waxman. I agree though--it's a perfect piece of music. Good as Heifetz is, I just like Sarasate better.
Don;t get me wrong,I admire these violinists(Kogan and Kavakos are my favourite technical musicians and Markov my favourite virtuoso)but accept the fact that all they can do is,at their absolute momment of musical and virtuosic glory ,to have a glimpse of "paradise".Hail to Paganini.
And today,he is compared to interpreters,who cant even improvise,who cant even play a cadenza of their own,without COMPOSING it first!The fact alone that they play Paganini with 100% respect to the score says it all.They are slaves of their technical mastery and cant create anything.THey are masters of the violin's technique but slaves to the violin its self.
"The interpreter is really an executant, carrying out the composer's intentions to the letter. He doesn't add anything that isn't already in the work. If he is talented, he allows us to glimpse the truth of the work that is in itself a thing of genius and that is reflected in him. He shouldn't dominate the music, but should dissolve into it."
Those were Richter's words, one of my fav pianists.I won't respect anyone less just because they can't compose, as long as they do justice to the piece.
Paganini must have been absolutelly perfect,technically speaking,to earn the respect and heart of than "immature" audience.And remember,he achieved this perfection totaly on his one.He travelled through uncharted musical waters,to the vast ends of violin transcendent virtuosity and returned to tell the tale.
Also,think this:Today,our ear is trained to sustain conciderable ammounts of strange violin sounds(as pizzicatti,artificial harmonics,highest registers,even false notes)because we are musically educated.Back in the 19th century however they were not that understanding.
This is backwards thinking. We live in a time where classical CD's make up less than 5% of all music sales. People are functionally illiterate when it comes to classical. The golden age of classical is over - it died a long long time ago. Back in the 19th century musicians were actually respected, now Joshua Bell is ignored when playing in public. Think about it some more - we are less musically educated than before and getting worse and worse. This is why I only listen to older violinists.
aimson was referring to that article about Josh Bell in the Washington Post. He played in the DC Subway during rush hour and only 2 people stopped. 1 person had just seen him in concert and recognized him.
Indeed classical music is marginal today.However,the few that appreciate its beauty and go to concerts are in a much higher level than music lovers of the 19th century.Back then only the "beautiful" and thus pleasant was acceptable.
Very few people listen to classical music today just because of popular youth culture.People my age scoff at me when I tell them I like classical music.Its rather sad really, but I'm glad to see animes like Nodame Cantabile (pretty awesome, I recommend it) that promote classical music among a younger audience.
I understand your despair. But don't give up!! Joshua Bell is alive and well and listened to by my chilldren because I attend. Then they ask where/what?
Paganini is/was a different class.He was a virtuoso.He could actually IMPROVISE.He could create.And imagine what violin genius he was,to play the violin in absolutely paranoid manners,like no one could possibly immagine and believe.He must have been so awesome that he "urged" people to assume he had done a pact with the devil.
OMG!I can't believe the comparisons made!How can someone compare Paganini to any modern violinist,no matter how good he is?Paganini was the creator,the authentic one!The true virtuoso and composer.All the others are just interpreters.The have great technical skills,sure,and they are inspired musicians but that's all.
listenig to and fro - i think probably kogans version just edges it. it just has something extra, not sure what...... still both versions are great and like i said totally trounce modern renditions
In these times, I´m living under the spell of Kogan. However, take out a single bar by any sincere musician who really loves what she or he loves...and this world will be much impoverished!Besides Kogan,as if it weren´t enough, now I have this "Waxman" by Heifetz. Could it be better? Composers=archangels, great interpreters=angels, music lovers=my brethens. The music? Well, the language of God and us all...Did my love for any one of them diminished my love for any of the other I love? NO!!
Answering your nice reply: I am also living in these days under Kogan´s spell. I have 14 CDs of Kogan and every piece is wonderfully played in a way unique to Kogan. Even sweet Brahms Sonta n.1 is played with great sweetness. Kogan is expressive in many ways! Having said that, I really can´t live w/o Kogan or Heifetz or any other great one I have recordings. For the time being, I am always going back to Kogan too-Thx DualThunder! KRegards--Luiz
This is the best of the Waxman "Carmens" without any doubt. Heifetz is argueably the greatest violinist of the 20th Century, and was the first to record this work. It"sizzles" as Perlman might say. Let's be democratic. Professionals generally agree in majority numbers: Heifetz was/is the best ever, period.
Your personal feelings are important. Have your opinions. Understand, however. You, who believe otherwise, are in the minority.
do you think so. i agree this is a superb rendition and it would be hard to find a better violinist than heifetz but ive just listend to the kogan version of this and i dont know-they are v.v close. too close for me to call. but certainly modern violinsts are not of this calibre inc vegerof and repin who i think are the 2 best currently
Heifetz, Menuhin, Oistrakh are legendary. I am sure Paganini and Joachim are as well but they were born too early to have their work recorded.
For Carmen Fantasie, however, Ms.Mutter's version is my favorite.
My blood vaporized when I heard her performance of its fourth movement for the first time. I cannot believe what she has turned into after I listened her rather slow version of LVB violin concerto in D major with Karajan.
agreed, although maybe menuhin not quite up there. however i feel as many violonists do that no-one either aliv or dead could have equalled the original master nicolo paganini, however since he lived in the 16/17 century and his work could not be recorded we'll never really know. btw where can you get mutters version i'll have to listn to it
most professionals would probably actually say that Paganini was truly the best... though lack of recording technology could have us all guessing for ever.
There are 16 people that dont like this recording LOL....
Maybe they could write why not ???
Kochenkova 4 weeks ago
In the day when Heifetz played this version, it was considered virtually unplayable. Now all the little wunderkinder virtuosi play it virtually note-perfect.. But none of their performances are in the same light cone as Heifetz. I remember when I was a kid listening to his recording of this piece on 78's, of which I wore out several.From the point of view of technical glitz, expressive warmth, pacing and just general overall great playing of music of this genre, it just doesn't get any better.
gitprofnikat 2 months ago
v. good , excellent
JESUS1John 5 months ago 2
he's simply a great great genius. there's really no doubt
karimosm 10 months ago
i personally prefer sarasate cuz of zigeunerweisen. u gotta admit it's an awesome piece.
Musicownz1997 10 months ago
I had a friend years ago from Russia, a fine violinist. He told me one could practice for 60 years and still not be as good as Heifetz. Well, when I listen to this Waxman, I feel that I must agree with my Russian friend.
concertviolinist 1 year ago
what is the critical consensus on whether the waxman or the sarasate is better?
curlyman217 1 year ago
anyone know the name of his violin used?
sdaters47501 1 year ago
@sdaters47501 ex-david guarnerius
PassionateViolinist 10 months ago
Passion, precision and perfection. The 3 P's defines Heifetz!
Amazing.
BigAntVideo 1 year ago
I can't find the score anywhere!
OutrunCitizen 1 year ago
@OutrunCitizen Because orchestral scores can only be rented out by Waxman or be given as a gift to higly talented violinsts.
danielsilva1977 1 year ago
such clean playing.
violaplayer1995 1 year ago
the best player i´ve ever heard!!!!
magicviolin1991 1 year ago
does anyone know where u can get sheet music for this?
anyabean17 1 year ago
@anyabean17 Give me ur email adress and i can send it to you. But only the violin part since that is all i have
danielsilva1977 1 year ago
@danielsilva1977 would it be possible if you could also send me the violin part.
Thanx
PassionateViolinist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@danielsilva1977 Hey could u email me the violin part? Really 100 thanks to you..guoheng17@hotmail.com thax!!
bountyhanz 1 year ago
Waxman and Carmen are both performed with orchestras just look at shaham or chang. Pianos are just an orchestral substitute for small performances. Waxman is more challenging, but many feel it is less melodic and more showy, so it is recorded less.
ubartkishi 1 year ago
I thought Bizet composed this.. oh well.
khira07 1 year ago 4
@khira07 You are correct, the original opera was composed by Bizet. Sarasate and Waxman wrote renditions for the violin. This Waxman version is considered to be more challenging and therefore less recorded. Also, the Sarasate version is often played with piano accompianament (Joshua Bell recorded one) while I've only heard Waxman with an orchestra.
aimson 1 year ago 6
@aimson I thought that the reason that the Waxman one is less performed was because it is so much more difficult to get the score. I've heard that the Sarasate one was more difficult... I'm just curious which one it is.
rapter9800 1 year ago
@aimson on the contrary, i've never heard the sarasate performed on the piano, wheras a friend of mine just performed the waxman with a piano accompaniment
runninriot15 1 year ago
@aimson it is less recorded because Waxman's son refuses to allow people to use his father's music because he thinks he can make money out of it.
klpj123 11 months ago
Wish have hanged up the people who made 15 votes "unlike" appeared in ratings for this video. Such things for show themselves so original :(
Rusalka1975 1 year ago
美しい！！！！
sunnymur20 1 year ago
This is one of the best performances I know of, all categories - since many years.
ManlioGiordano 1 year ago
Heifetz belongs to a golden age of music makers- see the schmaltzy movie Carnegie Hall where many musicians were featured in small excerpts the acting and story lines are risible. But the music makers are captured well and we can still see these great artists play or sing again. Of course Heifetz was phenomenal. His Beethoven and Brahms Concertos; along with many others are yardsticks from which others are still compared ...But there IS! no one performance -that is what is so interesting
frogmanpiano 1 year ago
just took 10min out of my morning to listen to this - excellent 10min
themusicdr 1 year ago 2
good alternative is Glenn Dicterow's live performance with the ny phil
Brokeaintbroken 1 year ago 2
Perfection! Thank you for posting.
mayatatyana1 1 year ago 5
Listen to other recordings of the Waxman or Sarasate fantasies and come back to this one - it is accomplished with an ease that is beyond belief. The Kogan is wondrous. Vengerov is terrific. The great recordings of the Sarasate by Anne Sophie Mutter, Gil Shaham and others. But Heifetz has shown himself to be in a class of his own.
2024Warren 1 year ago 6
Hmm, I actually think the Waxman version is easier than the Sarasate version, for the most part. But both are totally awesome!!
musicman3890 1 year ago
So beeping awesome!
nparioctiescutm 1 year ago
讚啦!
hn86868344 2 years ago
Sarasate performed Carmen Fantasy in 1883 based on Bizet's opera while Waxman adapted Sarasate's work much later for film in about 1946. In turn, Sarasate's music which very popular in Spain t the time most likely influenced Bizet's Carmen.
Damesellmystique 2 years ago
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the difference between Waxman and Sarasate's Carmen Fantasies? Sorry to ask but otherwise i'd remain ignorant... Both are based on the original Carmen by Bizet?
raulishnikov 2 years ago
The Waxman is much harder and very few people play it. Sarasate uses different variations and is more accessable.
violatione 2 years ago
thank you very much, i found it very interesting and somehow "deeper" that Sarasate's..
raulishnikov 2 years ago
yes both are based on carmen by bizet. i would say that waxman is a bit harder but sarasate's is more popular.
prayformercy4 2 years ago
I'm playing the Waxman right now. It's definitely a lot harder than the Sarasate. There is also a third version by Hubay, which is much more lyrical than the Waxman or Sarasate.
Unfortunately, I can't seem to find a recording anywhere of the Hubay version, so I cannot tell you which version I prefer of the three. However, while Waxman is definitely the more virtuosic showpiece, with a lot more flash, the Sarasate version imo is more representative of the opera, with many more variations.
violin1158 2 years ago
i also believe there is a wienawski version? and wasnt waxman a movie oomposer? i believe thats why it is more flashy compaired to the sarasate
BBRENTTAGHAPP 2 years ago
there's a really old recording of franz von vecsey from 1904 playing part the hubay version.
kevinlololol 2 years ago
He is defying God.
uyildiz 2 years ago 2
Just Perfect!
profQepa 2 years ago
This is impossibly good.
00Eregos00 2 years ago
Greatest violinist that ever lived!!
Case closed!
stuballs42 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Leonidas Kavakos is better! Case re-opened!!
violatione 2 years ago
To (Violatione) Then go listen to Him! Cased slammed shut ,locked ,and key lost forever!!!!
Jascha Heifetz is the best there ever was!!!!
stuballs42 2 years ago 25
Amen
Yoruuu 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Kogan is Better!!!!!!!!!
umcaca 2 years ago
ligeti is impossibley hard if we want to get on this topic
yellotheemcee 2 years ago
haha so iis offertorium, the shoenberg and the freeman etudes
personof11777 2 years ago
well........ i saw level repertoire from a violin masterclass website, and it wrote level 9, which is "mastery of all techniques" but level ten is " Crazy stuff , virtuosos only".............
AlexanderWung 2 years ago
@AlexanderWung
@AlexanderWung
I know which website you are talking about. It says "level 9" there, but they aren't talking about this piece. They were referring to the Sarasate Carmen Fantasy (which is already very difficult). This is the Waxman version, which is much harder. This is easily level 10 on that scale. I would rather play some of the Paganini caprice than this.
SkrPchr3 1 year ago
I'm not saying it isn't, but how is this song hard? As sometimes listening isn't always accurate.....
AlexanderWung 2 years ago
extremely difficult. basically a much harder version of sarasate's carmen fantasy.
heifetz plays it excellenty by the way..
lachnessmonster1 2 years ago
@AlexanderWung how about you go learn this? then get back to me when you do. Oh, then play it with the Berliner Philharmoniker and play "more accurate" than Heifetz. :)
kittyluvr12 1 year ago
Actually, if u are willing to practise 18 hours a day, with 6 hours of sleep, u can reach Heifetz's standard in two decades or three
karozlee 2 years ago
That's only considering that it's good practice -_-
iCheesey 2 years ago
I think I would need 20 hours a day for 50 years. :)
swanningaround 2 years ago
So do I.
PureSoapCleans 2 years ago
Thanks, Puresoap. :)
swanningaround 2 years ago
To work how you said, possible only you will be Genius or Crazy. -) btw he was played every day 24 skill's all. some of my teacher's saw him and was some his friend.
LeeEnKamon1989 2 years ago
FLABBERGASTED
TheWaterfallman 2 years ago
Improvstan
Magic, passionate, emotionally daring, windswept and full, unlike any violinist before, after and maybe ever to ever be. With a lightness of touch and tone and speed soaring and dancing through the spectacular the neuromechanism of his (Heifitz's) brain.
drstanleytaub 2 years ago
this is just SO musical.
jimqa2 2 years ago
WHY IS HE SO GOOD?!?!?!?! -tears-
xxorchdork1319xx 2 years ago 3
someone on youtube posted heifetz playing the end of SARASATE's CARMEN FANTASY...i didnt no he ever played it!!!!!!! this is amazing btw
tennisballer17 2 years ago
actually, it was written for him XD... but its a pain to get the sheet music for it, you have to request it in writing from waxman's son
ViolinSpaz 2 years ago
no i know....someone posted heifetz playing sarasate's as well as this version. thats what i was referring to
tennisballer17 2 years ago
why? wouldnt it just be easier to make it commercially available? imagine like 10938409 violinists emailing him about it!
xXLeafXNinjaXx 2 years ago
put it this way, John Waxman is not a pleasant man to deal with, I'd go so far to say he was a jerk. But its considered the most difficult violin piece ever written, so most dont try to get the music. He still owns the copyright so noone else can publish it.
ViolinSpaz 2 years ago 2
the most difficult im not so sure. there are definitely musically and technically pieces
personof11777 2 years ago
actually, it is :D its been officially confirmed by guiness, not that they would post it in their record books but most violinists agreed, so its semi unofficial. its ARGUABLY the hardest and i must say, i found it alot more challanging to play than the wieniawski, prokofiev, mendelssohn or even tchaikovsky concertos.
ViolinSpaz 2 years ago
Guiness? Are you kidding me?
Saying something is the hardest piece is a bit silly. For whom is it hard? If someone is really good at technique but not naturally musical, then Mozart could be the hardest, though a good 13 year-old can play most of the notes of anything by Mozart.
bennyboy12341234 2 years ago
It is NOT technically harder than the first wieniawski, and NOT musically harder than the Beethoven IMHO. A There are no hardest songs
personof11777 2 years ago
Yes, I accept with you it's not harder than 1st Wieniawski but here speaking not about hard or easy It's just one of the most beautiful music. I did 1st Wieniawski and Waxman there are different and every one has some speciality dfficult's. only wieniawski 3rd movement finale you can practise more than one or two years to play it good. In Waxman has composer but his one this peace made him Popular on the world.
takhirviolinest 2 years ago
To violinspaz: you didn't say Paganini, Paganini wrote many hard songs than Wieniawski, Prokofiev, Mendelssohn, and Tchaikovsky. and his concerto is somewhat harder than this IMO only though.........
AlexanderWung 2 years ago
some of wienawski's pieces seem harder than paganini's such as his first violin concerto
BBRENTTAGHAPP 2 years ago
I support that
Bautisnemo 2 years ago 2
if you want the music i can email it to you, but only the violin part sorry, post again if you are interested
ViolinSpaz 2 years ago
Heifetz was the best of his generation. He cannot be compared (in my opinion) to Hilary Hahn or Itzhak Perlman. Heifetz's best performance is the Introduction & Rondo Cappricioso concert in this movie with those orphans... I can't remember what it's called...
MrMorfonios 2 years ago 6
the movie is -They Shall Have Music-. and yea he was the best of the 1900s
oldgoat5 2 years ago 2
They Shall Have Music is what your thinking of, and yes, i agree hands down...and its on film!!!
carrottoponcrak 2 years ago
oh i dont know, he was perfect in technique but the 1900's had a hell of a lot of brilliant musicians and they were good in different areas, Isaac stern, yehudi menuhin, oistrak, heifetz, all were good in different areas, for heifetz it was definitely technique
ViolinSpaz 2 years ago
Very impressing!
ketutsuarma 2 years ago 3
this and kogan are simply the best available.
billythekid20 2 years ago 12
PERFECT
jazzecca2007 2 years ago 2
ive heard recording of maxim vengerov playing this version, it seems a bit faster but i prefer heifetz playing it anyways
luckixlino 2 years ago 6
I am going to up load of this very piece by Leonid Kogan, it's a equally fantastic work.
sivery70914 2 years ago 2
Heifetz plays the Carmen Fantasy better than Itzhak Perlman, although it's not of the same version~
violinforever3000 2 years ago
Wow, what a great argument going on here. Intelligent and informative from both sides. Also many thanks to uploader.
mpc999STEP 2 years ago
Dear IsaacDelarge--you have no reason to apologize for anything. You are clearly a sensitive, thinking person who can't fathom silly, ignorant or dangerous remarks. Leave it alone my friend. They're all over YouTube.
Enjoy Heifetz and rest assured that there are generations and generations that agree with you.
ipmoic 2 years ago 3
This is how one can express his powerful emotions through pure music rather than his body language.
It always seemed to me that when a performer lacks the pure skills of performing his instrument, hed use his body language to fill in the blanks. Heifetz never needed any body language, there was simply no blank spots... There is not a single violinist in the world who wouldnt envy Heiftez's superb performance power
mehran1064 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
in 1998, a boy named zelda was beaten to death by a bunch of bullys who taunted and made fun of him because his name was based of a video game title. days later, he killed those bullys by setting their rooms on fire. don't close the marked as spam box now! post this comment onto 10 videos in the next 15 minutes or else zelda will come to your room on the nearest tuesday night and kill you by setting your room in a blaze.
elibron97 2 years ago
IsaacDelarge indeed
BaRToLoMaSi 2 years ago
Comment removed
jlbgsouthman 2 years ago
I'm sorry, but Heifetz's stature FAR outweighs that of Kogan's. Ask Perlman, Stern, Milstein, Oistrakh, even Kogan himself and they'll tell you the same thing: that Heifetz was by far greatest amongst them.
To understand why this is, you have to be able to listen beyond the basics (clarity, intonation, etc.) and get into things like manipulation of intonation, width of vibrato, diversity of bow speed, etc.
One can prefer Kogan over Heifetz as a musician, but not as a violinist.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago
Spot on analysis.
musicmatt09 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Spot on bullshit.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
OK genius, suck on this.
When asked to say a few words about Heifetz, Oistrakh replied, "There are many good violinists, then there is Heifetz." When asked to name the greatest violinist in the world, Kogan said, "Heifetz. He is no doubt the emperor." Stern said, "When the books are closed on this century, this will be known as the Century of Heifetz."
These are direct quotes. You obviously don't know shit about violin. Do yourself a favor and don't talk about things you don't understand.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hahaha!!!What an immature shithead you are!What did you expect,retarded asshole,to say that Heifetz is no good and that they are the best of the best?They respected him for being a pioneer and that's all.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So before quoting something make sure you understand it.And hurry up,Lord Heifetz awaits your sacrifice.Worshiping dickhead.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
"They respected him for being a pioneer and that's all."
How the fuck do you know that? I've given you quotes and direct evidence. You've offered nothing but unfounded opinions and ignorant conjectures. And now you've resorted to name-calling. Tell-tale sign of someone who knows he's got no argument.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago
LoL!If you don;t like to be called names then don;t start it yourself.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
It was your fanaticism and immaturity that drove you to verbal attacks,just because I had a different opinion.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
Be a man and taste your own medicine.If you don't like it make sure you don't use it on others.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
And did you actually read the quotes? These are legendary violinists in their own rights with huge egos, who willingly admit that Heifetz is the greatest amongst them. They wouldn't have said these things if it weren't true. They haven't said these things about any other 20th century violinist.
This isn't 'Heifetz-worship,' this is fact. And so far you've offered nothing to disprove this fact.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago
Huge egos??If they had a drop of ego inside them they would have left USSR because of the humiliations and constant control over them.They where humble men,much more humble than you or me and they just wanted to play music. They had no problem saying that Heifetz was a great violinist,even that he is the greatest among them.Just out of respect for a pioneer who was older and the first in the line of violin virtuosos of the 20th century.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
Look, I apologize if I came across that way. You are certainly entitled to your opinions, however wrong and unfounded they may be.
This has nothing to do with you or I, and everything to do with Heifetz. When you say that he plays with no distinct characteristic outside of "speed" and that he is famous because he spent his life outside the USSR, you are just plain wrong. I've offered you specific evidence disproving your assumptions, none of which you've addressed.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago
I said countless times that he was a pioneer at his time and that he is the first in a line of virtuosos of the 20th century.Because playing at such speed flawlessly was unbelievable at his time and continues to be nowadays.But his sound was never up to his speed.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
Also,you did not offer any real proof.Some statements only from masters like Oistrakh or Kogan who appreciated heifetz's achievements and respected him.Their technique was equal to Heifetz's and personally I think that Kogan was even better,having concentrated in purely virtuoso repertoire.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
"Also,you did not offer any real proof.Some statements only from masters like Oistrakh or Kogan"
LOL, how is that not proof? Oistrakh agrees w/me, Kogan agrees w/me, so do Stern, Perlman, Kreisler, etc...and that's NOT proof? Do you know better than they do?
"Their technique was equal to Heifetz"
Almost all violinists would disagree. If you really believe that Heifetz was known only for his speed, then I am sincerely sorry for you because you aren't hearing what everyone else is hearing.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago 4
But this is a matter of personal views.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
No one can prove that one of these legendary violinists is the best.One can argue about it but not prove it.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
I apologise likewise.
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
Look, my friend, if you like Kogan or Oistrakh better than Heifetz, fine. That's great. That's your personal opinion.
But don't attribute Heifetz's fame only to politics or "speed," because there was much more to his playing than simply those attributes.
IsaacDelarge 2 years ago 2
jesus christ man u ccouldnt just "leave" the USSR
BRICKsauce 2 years ago
Heifetz is more brilliant and passionate
Kogan's much more raw and devillish
Which one is better is truly up to musical taste. Notice how i said MUSICAL TASTE. At their level, nobody cares about what you said unless it has a musical purpose. We are musicians, not technicians, nor music theorists. Your last statement just shows that you belong to the latter. As yo-yo ma once wisely said "I am first a human being, second a musician, and third a cellist"
knockknockflowerpot 2 years ago
I'm pretty sure Perlman, Stern, Milstein, Oistrakh, Kogan and Heifetz etc etc have all mastered "things like manipulation of intonation, width of vibrato, diversity of bow speed, etc. ".
It comes down to personal preference, in general I find Kogan's surgically brutal playing more interesting to listen to than Heifetz heavily romantic wafting laced with brilliance.
You shouldn't say violinist x is better than violinist y, at this level, it's just disrespectful.
vyvyanos 2 years ago 2
Yeah,he's right,I just closed the phone in Kogan's face!What a prick,he made me mad insisting Heifetz is a better violinist than him!Same shit with Oistrakh...No pride at all,he was like "Heifetz is my master!I'm nothing compared to him!I want to kiss his feet!He's my messiah!"
MIchaelYiochalas 2 years ago
Interesting..Heifetz v Kogan
both truly great violinists, both with mind shattering techniques (as a fiddle player I can appreciate that!!) after that is said personal preferences come sharply into play. But I agree with FERViolin2010....you really can't say that Heifetz is the best.....he is just hefietz!!
parian64 2 years ago 2
props to Waxman, thank goodness for an actual quality use of Carmen. As for this version, after hearing Heifetz' version, all the others just sound wrong.
itsthenathan 2 years ago
kogan's is great but you can't beat heifetz he is the best of the best
noscaasifilmstudios 2 years ago 4
Comment removed
FERViolin2010 2 years ago
no, no im sorry..u cant say that , i think kogan does it better
FERViolin2010 2 years ago
Agree, Kogan version is the best!
jlbgsouthman 2 years ago 2
Hey! Where is the Kogan´s version? Put it back please...
cohataiv 2 years ago 2
Check out Leonid Kogan's version. Also amazing...
Hotentote 2 years ago 4
I've heard Perlman, Midori, Venergrov, et al, and still think the Heifetz recording of the Carmen Fantasy is the best. Such passion. Of course it's edited for him, with some added parts, but who cares?! I speak as a clarinetist, who has learned much from violinists. They sing, and I try to, also.
skirun9 2 years ago
Heifetz never ceases to amaze me.
This is an absolutely beautiful interpretation of the Carmen Fantasie.
King9Dante 3 years ago
That slide he does is so seductive! How does he do it?
allstarmark12345 3 years ago
I'm simply astonished to see all the comments about " who is the best violinist. WHO CARES? There's absolutely no point arguing, beacause noone can ever have the best recording of every piece and we tend to have opinions about players, not definite sentences. The best thing about violinists is the variety, you have at least a few hundred people worth listening to, probably many more including quite a bit of simple college students, who have their one favourite piece they play like noone else...
Admiral337 3 years ago 6
Nowadays, as long as you can play any instrument, people(Unmusically educated) say you're good at the instrument, I find that rather stupid... this can only encourage people to stay at a low level since people saying a low level skills is good(clearly not).... Which means, great instrumentalist unlikely to exist anymore... I wonder why.....
SIlentPianist47 3 years ago
I and by chiming in that sentiment, you imply that Jascha Heifetz isn't one of the most beautiful violinists in his time? I find that rather surprising, but it seems you may have drawn that conclusion from the fact this is a more stereotypical piece, so his theories might not shine through in spite of the familiar melody. If you were to listen to Jascha play Tchaikovsky's Serenade Melancolique you might draw the conclusion that he is an artist, but it's you'r choice.
Lukecash12 3 years ago
You misunderstood me, Jascha Heifetz does not belong to nowadays, I was referring to nowadays as in, 21st century? =.=
SIlentPianist47 3 years ago
oh, sorry. I thought you were saying that Jascha was just another violinist because this a common and fairly technical piece. Have you heard him do the Serenade Melancolique before, though? He's my favorite interpreter of it.
Lukecash12 3 years ago 2
Thanks for telling me that! I will listen to it. It's alright btw.
SIlentPianist47 3 years ago
Your welcome.
Lukecash12 3 years ago
Thank you aimson.
HappyDuder43 3 years ago 2
Wow the violin sounds better than the voice! Sometimes those ladies sound like they're going to explode. Dont get me wrong i like opera but this sounds way better than a lady to me.
godsloved3 3 years ago
he plays very differently than most of our musicians nowadays. i don't see why he cannot be admired as one of our best violinists in the world. i intend to play, like many others, differently than the sheet music. i have my own style, and so does he. though if you'd like to say "perfect", listen to Gil Shaham's carmen fantasy (first part). he follows the score; however it is a little different.
yoshie827 3 years ago 2
I may be misunderstanding you, but Gil Shaham's Carmen is different because it's a different piece of music. Sarasate rather than Waxman. I agree though--it's a perfect piece of music. Good as Heifetz is, I just like Sarasate better.
somecubsfan 3 years ago
Don;t get me wrong,I admire these violinists(Kogan and Kavakos are my favourite technical musicians and Markov my favourite virtuoso)but accept the fact that all they can do is,at their absolute momment of musical and virtuosic glory ,to have a glimpse of "paradise".Hail to Paganini.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
And today,he is compared to interpreters,who cant even improvise,who cant even play a cadenza of their own,without COMPOSING it first!The fact alone that they play Paganini with 100% respect to the score says it all.They are slaves of their technical mastery and cant create anything.THey are masters of the violin's technique but slaves to the violin its self.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
"The interpreter is really an executant, carrying out the composer's intentions to the letter. He doesn't add anything that isn't already in the work. If he is talented, he allows us to glimpse the truth of the work that is in itself a thing of genius and that is reflected in him. He shouldn't dominate the music, but should dissolve into it."
Those were Richter's words, one of my fav pianists.I won't respect anyone less just because they can't compose, as long as they do justice to the piece.
IAMINDESPAIR 3 years ago
Paganini must have been absolutelly perfect,technically speaking,to earn the respect and heart of than "immature" audience.And remember,he achieved this perfection totaly on his one.He travelled through uncharted musical waters,to the vast ends of violin transcendent virtuosity and returned to tell the tale.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
Also,think this:Today,our ear is trained to sustain conciderable ammounts of strange violin sounds(as pizzicatti,artificial harmonics,highest registers,even false notes)because we are musically educated.Back in the 19th century however they were not that understanding.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
This is backwards thinking. We live in a time where classical CD's make up less than 5% of all music sales. People are functionally illiterate when it comes to classical. The golden age of classical is over - it died a long long time ago. Back in the 19th century musicians were actually respected, now Joshua Bell is ignored when playing in public. Think about it some more - we are less musically educated than before and getting worse and worse. This is why I only listen to older violinists.
aimson 3 years ago
I agree with you however I wouldn't cite Joshua Bell when discussing the best of our generation. The guys is hardly the best we have to offer.
cooooooooooolgy89 3 years ago
Then I would really love to here who is. Names please!! (With all due respect)
mpc999STEP 3 years ago
Hilary Hahn, Maxim Vengerov, Christian Tetzlaff, Stefan Jackiw, Kavakos, Mutter,....
cooooooooooolgy89 2 years ago
aimson was referring to that article about Josh Bell in the Washington Post. He played in the DC Subway during rush hour and only 2 people stopped. 1 person had just seen him in concert and recognized him.
STFine 3 years ago
Indeed classical music is marginal today.However,the few that appreciate its beauty and go to concerts are in a much higher level than music lovers of the 19th century.Back then only the "beautiful" and thus pleasant was acceptable.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
I agree completely.
Very few people listen to classical music today just because of popular youth culture.People my age scoff at me when I tell them I like classical music.Its rather sad really, but I'm glad to see animes like Nodame Cantabile (pretty awesome, I recommend it) that promote classical music among a younger audience.
IAMINDESPAIR 3 years ago
Thank you again for the upload!
I understand your despair. But don't give up!! Joshua Bell is alive and well and listened to by my chilldren because I attend. Then they ask where/what?
mpc999STEP 3 years ago
ha! love the ending
spacemambu5 3 years ago
Paganini is/was a different class.He was a virtuoso.He could actually IMPROVISE.He could create.And imagine what violin genius he was,to play the violin in absolutely paranoid manners,like no one could possibly immagine and believe.He must have been so awesome that he "urged" people to assume he had done a pact with the devil.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
OMG!I can't believe the comparisons made!How can someone compare Paganini to any modern violinist,no matter how good he is?Paganini was the creator,the authentic one!The true virtuoso and composer.All the others are just interpreters.The have great technical skills,sure,and they are inspired musicians but that's all.
MIchaelYiochalas 3 years ago
listenig to and fro - i think probably kogans version just edges it. it just has something extra, not sure what...... still both versions are great and like i said totally trounce modern renditions
themusicdr 3 years ago 2
Dig the ending...wow, incredible!
zevno 3 years ago
In these times, I´m living under the spell of Kogan. However, take out a single bar by any sincere musician who really loves what she or he loves...and this world will be much impoverished!Besides Kogan,as if it weren´t enough, now I have this "Waxman" by Heifetz. Could it be better? Composers=archangels, great interpreters=angels, music lovers=my brethens. The music? Well, the language of God and us all...Did my love for any one of them diminished my love for any of the other I love? NO!!
lamsalgado 3 years ago 2
i like both the heifetz and kogan renditions but i always find myself coming back to kogan's. i believe that it is just that little bit better.
DualThunder 2 years ago 6
Answering your nice reply: I am also living in these days under Kogan´s spell. I have 14 CDs of Kogan and every piece is wonderfully played in a way unique to Kogan. Even sweet Brahms Sonta n.1 is played with great sweetness. Kogan is expressive in many ways! Having said that, I really can´t live w/o Kogan or Heifetz or any other great one I have recordings. For the time being, I am always going back to Kogan too-Thx DualThunder! KRegards--Luiz
lamsalgado 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
FERViolin2010 2 years ago
right on
FERViolin2010 2 years ago
anywhere in England you can get this stuff? we have no where out here except the bodlean and that's not got music I think
EuskaltelEuskadi 3 years ago
This is the best of the Waxman "Carmens" without any doubt. Heifetz is argueably the greatest violinist of the 20th Century, and was the first to record this work. It"sizzles" as Perlman might say. Let's be democratic. Professionals generally agree in majority numbers: Heifetz was/is the best ever, period.
Your personal feelings are important. Have your opinions. Understand, however. You, who believe otherwise, are in the minority.
gierck1 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
as hitler once said
fuck democracy
im hitler god dam it
lol
jus kidding
this is a good recording
pity we couldnt get video...
yellotheemcee 3 years ago
do you think so. i agree this is a superb rendition and it would be hard to find a better violinist than heifetz but ive just listend to the kogan version of this and i dont know-they are v.v close. too close for me to call. but certainly modern violinsts are not of this calibre inc vegerof and repin who i think are the 2 best currently
themusicdr 3 years ago 2
Heifetz, Menuhin, Oistrakh are legendary. I am sure Paganini and Joachim are as well but they were born too early to have their work recorded.
For Carmen Fantasie, however, Ms.Mutter's version is my favorite.
My blood vaporized when I heard her performance of its fourth movement for the first time. I cannot believe what she has turned into after I listened her rather slow version of LVB violin concerto in D major with Karajan.
ebooksworm 3 years ago
agreed, although maybe menuhin not quite up there. however i feel as many violonists do that no-one either aliv or dead could have equalled the original master nicolo paganini, however since he lived in the 16/17 century and his work could not be recorded we'll never really know. btw where can you get mutters version i'll have to listn to it
themusicdr 3 years ago
most professionals would probably actually say that Paganini was truly the best... though lack of recording technology could have us all guessing for ever.
donesixfour 3 years ago
agreed :)
lotrCoolguy 3 years ago