Added: 4 years ago
From: truecrypt
Views: 25,726
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (80)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Cziffra !!!

  • Its great , but i still think that cziffra is better .

  • Unbelievably great. Makes Richter and Cziffra sound like slobs, which they definitely were not!

  • I really enjoyed listening to this... and then I looked at some of the recent comments. It's interesting how people complain that they can't *hear* anything "better" (not my own word) when they refuse to *listen*

  • Can someone tell me, What grade is this piece in?

    I just want to know.

  • @123mazeppa The RCM British or Canadian grading system is both a blessing and a curse, it is useful for beginner students, but it pretends that a "level" can be given to all pieces...which is not the case; although I would but it beyond 11; a good 3rd year undergrad or graduate student piece for reference; similar to Gaspard or Transcendental Etudes.

  • Busoni plays this piece far better than Rachmaninoff.

  • @marcxopoco

    You have already posted *enough*.

  • neither @truecrypt or the rest of the posters here have ever heard Busoni play this piece.

  • @marcxopoco

    As I said before - you make broad assumptions with no factual proof.

    Not to mention you're not polite either.

  • @truecrypt, tell us what specific passages Rachmaninoff plays better than Busoni.

    Waiting.

  • @marcxopoco

    Nothing will help those of you who define "better" as "faster and louder",

    You compare piano roll with acoustic recording... Passages played by mechanical piano are unnaturally fast and loud. Rachmaninoff's passages are not only fast and clear but also played with great elegance and superb intonation. F.e. check out measures 47-49 (B-dur scales). FYO I've never said Rachmaninoff "plays better" - "they both are better".

  • @truecrypt hasn't heard Busoni play this piece.

    And he never will.

    Rachmaninoff's playing of this particular piece is dry. His scales are not as good as Busoni's.

    They are not as even as Busoni's.

    And Rachmaninoff was a great player and technician.

    Find De Pachmann's youtube recording of part of this same piece for a remarkable demonstration of remarkably even and controlled passagework combined with trills, the ultimate "pearly touch."

  • @marcxopoco

    I've given you plenty of opportunities to face your own ignorance and rudeness. Probably your predilection to boxing diminished your intellectual and emotional responses. I should follow good old wisdom - "Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Hopefully people will see the difference.

  • @truecrypt has never answered my questions of what specific passages Racxhmaninoff plays better than Busoni in this piece.

    Waiting.

  • @marcxopoco

    For those of you who have difficulties to read my answers I repeat - check out measures 47-49 (B-dur scales). Sorry if you can't read score or don't hear about B-dur.

    It's time for you to go... blocked!

  • Liszt did not like to hear this piece played by others, the melody was often blurred and resulted in it being played, well ... badly. if only he could have heard Rachmaninoff ....

  • rachmaninoff - first class composer, conductor and pianist!

  • Amazing. One of the best pianists/composers ever, playing one of the best pianists/composers ever.

    Can only fall in love with this.

  • Fantastic!!!

    

  • whoa!

  • @marcxopoco

    Why do you assume that people who disagree with you are "halfwits" and "have never heard" Busoni's recording? That would be halfwitted! ;)

    You compare brilliant mechanical (and artificially "enhanced") recording with acoustic one. Again, Busoni was a great pianist, but nobody's scales (including Busoni) could put Rachmaninoff to shame. Piano art is not a "scoring game"... and please don't use CAPS excessively.

  • @marcxopoco

    Wrong assumptions! ;)

    1. I've heard Busoni's recording and...

    2. I didn't "evaluate" Busoni's playing or said anything negative about him.

    Seems like you're trapped by your own suspicions and can't accept a very simple idea, - primitive quantitative comparison (speed, loudness, amount of notes, etc.) doesn't work here.

  • @marcxopoco

    I really enjoyed our exchange... You know very little but assume a lot! ;)

  • @marcxopoco

    Is the recording of this piece by Busoni an audio recording? If so, where could I find it?

  • @marcxopoco You dare snub Rachmaninoff? You are talking about all us half wits, too bad you've left no wit for yourself.

  • Rachmaninofs interpretations are always intelligent and with a background of solid technique. His concerts must have been a very big event as the Horowitz concerts were.

    The russian intelligence in exile. Was a big chance for the USA to get these pianists and composers.

  • At approx. 7:12 Busoni either adds his own coda, (spectacular) or because of limited recording space the composition is cut or in typical Liszt fashion, it's another version! I will post the Everest recording, 1970s, of the piano roll. The Everest recording is far superior to the CD issued a few years back - hopefully soon.

  • Is Busoni's interpretation on youtube? I can't find it.

  • Only When you can play better than Rachmaninoff and Busoni yourself can you have the right to compare them. None of us can so just sit back and enjoy a great piece of music played by one of the all time greats.

  • Please don't compare mechanical Busoni's record (not regulated dynamically and pedally bur freely in tempo - Welte Mignon- compared with Ampico) with Rach's acoustic recording!

  • Comparing two giants is a very difficult and often ungrateful task, especially when you try to "analyze" why "one is better than another".

    Busoni was one of the Giants, but he wasn't superior to Rachmaninoff in any way.

  • Dear marcxopoco,

    As long as you clearly state that your comment reflects your personal views only, I have no problem with it (even if it sounds ludicrous).

  • Extraordinary tension and elasticity in his playing that makes it all of one luminous cloth. Love the Russian propulsive musical approach.

  • had roles been reversed would franz have played rach, well we can dream cant we

  • important question:

    at 3:57 he plays it differently than cziffra.

    does anyone know which way is the way liszt wrote it?

  • He really wonderfully, and subtly captures the dance aspect of this. PS. although I don't mind this in a pianist, I think it would be fascinating if it were the case for Rachmaninov; in 0.54-0.56, is it just me who hears him singing a little bit along with it?!?!? And a few tiny other moments throughout...

  • I listened several times, but didn't catch the singing... doesn't mean it's not there. That would be incredible to hear.

  • i'll have to learn this :| :((

  • Love the taut rhythm and fleet finger work. In fact for me this is the finest performance of the piece.

  • Wonderfully light and clear. Marvellous facility and touch aligned with a sense of sheer joy in the music.

  • i had no idea of this recording. thank you!

  • Go rachmaninoff

    he looks handsome.

    isn't it???

    nice right??

    cah bor!

  • Meticulous.

    Stunning.

    Gorgeous.

  • What coruscating fioritura!

  • wow this is the first time I have heard Rachmaninov play Liszt. This sounds maybe better then Earl Wild and Georgy Cziffra..

  • Rachmaninov is just one of the best pianis ever lived! Wonderful played!

  • I like how he almost "swings" the main theme as he plays it. I love Rachmaninoff!

  • physical ability and pride have the potential to squeeze changes from the music of the composer.

  • No, Rachmaninoff couldn't play 2 octaves ;)

    But he could play parallel double thirds with one hand!

    Big hands do make playing octaves easier, but the same time they (hands) become a "liability" in different types of technique (thirds, some *fine* passages). Rachmaninoff technical skills are amazing, but what makes his playing so special is a composer/conductor approach - he never gives up a big picture for fine details... still all details are there.

  • Well stated.

  • What do you mean by parallel double thirds, is that like c and e and c and e an octave higher.

  • Yes, exactly!

  • I believe he could play and ocate + a sixth (how do you call that interval in english?) C -defgabcdefg- A. I saw a picture where he plays that interval. if you look at his preludes you'll see that he was capable of that kind of chords. (G B B and then the third finger in the C#)

    what an amazing artist he was.. cheers guys!

  • 13th - Any jazz pianist who can reach that can play amazingly! The 13th is the fundamental of blues.

  • send me a message with the link i want to listen it

    i didnt find it on youtube

  • search Oscar Peterson...

  • Thanks, I can do that too but I'm not really a pianist unfortunatly.

  • What fascinates me about Rachmaninoff's playing is his clarity in the midst of finger-crunching passages. His powerful technique isn't intimidated by Liszt's difficult octave passages, either. Amazing!

  • everyone knows he's a phenomenal pianist, and i find this photo hauntingly beautiful & elegant in very rachmaninoffian way with a hint of sadness, nostalgia.

  • Lord of the piano gods.

  • No 2 is the popular one of Liszt's Polonaises.

    No 1 is rarely, if ever, played. In all my 70 years, (and I'm a classical pianist), I don't think I've ever heard No 1.

  • whaaaaaaaaaaaat!?!?!!?! DUDE?!??? no.1 is so much more beautiful than polonaise no.2

    classicalarchives . com

    they have it. GO LISTEN.

  • cziffra has a great recoding of no1 i have it from an all cziffra/liszt CD set. its phenomenal.

  • How many polonaises Liszt composed?

    Just 2?

    I coudn't find the first one here in youtube...

  • Two Polonaises S223

    No 1 Polonaise mélancolique in C minor

    No 2 Polonaise in E major

    YT is not a comprehensive source of classical music. For CDs check Amazon, for music scores - a lot of online stores.

  • Thank you!

  • such a nice performance. But i still wish I could hear the No. 1 Polonaise in C minor, by Rachmaninoff's . as i had learned to play it way way back. . .

  • such a fabulous performance. terrifying to think of playing this with such 'revealing' pedaling

  • I am surprised that no one has commented on Rachmaninoff's playing C instead of E on the third beat of the first measure. Is this an improvement? Or if it isn't,why not? For those who think it might be worthwhile to hear a Liszt pupil play this Polonaise,Arthur de Greef's performance is on You Tube.

  • I had just assumed it was an error,a minor slip not worth interrupting the imperious flow for. I certainly don't consider it an improvement as it breaks the logic of those reiterated E's. It doesn't affect the whole tremendous sweep of this commanding interpretation.

  • I guess YouTube IS good for something

    It was mentioned on KPBS San Diego classical that there were such videos on youtube. I hadn't even considered there were recordings of Rachmaninov - thank you for posting this!

  • What I love is the playing ahead of the beat combined with the quick micro-accelerandi.

    There is no other way to get the playfulness as he does it here.Shame it's so rare today.

  • Astounding! Makes Cziffra (love him) sound like a student. This style of strict virtuosity is lost forever leaving most pianists sounding like clones. For such huge hands the clarity & tempo is beyond comprehension; strict Polonaise tempo to the end. Rachmaninov stands supreme!

Loading...
Alert icon
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