Chopin Etude op 10 n°1 by Pachmann and Argerich

[utubuser10]

the chopinzee...

[FromTheHeart99]

Thanks 1fattyfatman for your description of Pachmann's playing. I would have chosen your words to describe it had I heard this etude performed by him in 1993 when I wrote "Zee Maestro", a two-hour motion picture about the life of de Pachmann. I'm the only one to have done so, yet the project remains of little interest to the film industry. You are a true soul-mate concerning Pachmann and a very fine pianist as well. In my dreams my film will be made one day and you can do the sound track.

[1fattyfatman]

Love how Pachmann ( fine virtuoso even then and able to execute some pretty amazing passage work ) chose to turn this piece into a majestic preludium tastefully announcing the chordal progressions along a string of pearls. Argerich is unmatched for that chattering novelty teeth approach though..  each awesome

[Grazpop]

And, for those of you who want "perfect and perfectly boring" perfection, try Pollini. It's flawless, yet metronomic. Argerich's is another story entirely.

[Grazpop]

What it doesn't report anywhere here is that this was taken from a LIVE performance by Argerich from the Chopin Competition. Bad miking, no real choice of pianos, nerves, one take, no post-production. And she STILL turns in one of the greatest performances of this, ever. Imagine what she'd have done with real preparation. She learning the Chopin works as the competition progressed, or so she has said. She was only 24, and had been only in two prior contests, both of which she won, before age 18.

[EmdrGreg]

...it is an etude. It is ok to hear the performances within the context of etudes.

[PhilPhilUSA]

What a marvellous comparison. Within Chopin there are multitudes! Thank you for this fine post.

[vint22]

don´t see,where are TWO great pianists?))well,tell me,could you compare Pachman with Liszt?i know,there is no recordings of him,but...you can imagine,when you hear the second part.

[vint22]

well,tell me,would you compare Pachman with Liszt?i know,there is no recordings of him,but...you can imagine,when you hear this!c´est ridicule)

[bluematrix109]

OMmgg!! Argich's version is the FASTEST i've heard to date! OOmmmmmmmggg!! FUck! (She was pretty when she was young too...=p)

[daniel15671]

To my taste, DePachmann's art isn't best desplayed by this etude, although he manages it well. He was more effective in the smaller works, the nocturnes and waltzes. And I think that was the general consensus in his own day. Marta argerich is at her best when playing highly virtuosic literature, the more notes the better.

[dak91424]

Pachmann presents a sort of eternal motion with this etude, he give a poetic but unorthodox interpretation, Agerich plays it the way it should be played -with fire.

[robertslistening]

Argerich rose to international prominence when she won the seventh International Frederick Chopin Piano Competition in Warsaw in 1965, at age 24. One of her performances in that winning campaign was a defiantly confident reading of Chopin's Etude in C major (Op. 10, No. 1)

So, there is the true critique...and the winner is. LOL

[robertslistening]

I'd say there's more like one way to play it. The way Martha Argerich played it. She had hot fingers when she was young, I'll say that much. I like her version much better. I also like Valentina Lisitsa and Pollini. Sorry but Pachmann's version just didn't inspire me. This is a study and to me meant to be a test of speed and accuracy. I'm sure Pachmann was good, but Argerich is great.

[hymntonight]

Argerich as usual brings spectacular fire to her performance. But she hardly brings anything new to the table. Pachmann on the other hand might be criticized for lack to technique, but the almost childlike simplicity of his interpretation is, in my opinion, beautiful, memorable, and far more interesting. At any rate, pairing these 2 performances makes for odd comparison.

[lovesGenet]

Pachmann gets the middle voice at this slow tempo and actually starts playing slower by the fifth measure .Funny thing he is the earliest rec of the Godowsky etude.Imagine this geezer playing left hand revolutionary etude.I cant believe he had a career in the age of Sauer,Rosenthal.hofmann Lhevinne. I would love to read what some REAL PROFESSIONALS _think _of his playing. PADEREWSKI very stylish recordings faulty techniquebut his playing is VERY ALIVE. DE Pachmann played 24etudesallkeys?HA

[ayso78]

@lovesGenet I think Franz Liszt qualifies as a "real pro," and he said that de Pachmann's playing resembled Chopin's (de Pachmann studied with the Chopin pupil Rubio). Even Liszt had to take a breather while playing his own Tannhauser overture in his later years, so bear in mind that de Pachmann was around 63 when he recorded this. Before de Pachmann was known as the "Chopinzee," he was a serious artist.

[xper2xper]

I consider neither of them to be superior to the other.. It's just a matter of style of making music in 19th century vs. 20th..

If Argerich would be playing like that in those days, I honestly do not think it would be appreciated by the audiences. Same applies to De Pachmann, performing now...

What remains is just the personal taste of our own very ears of today...

I find De Pachmann more zestful whereby Argerich is more conspicuous..

Cheers !

[alexmanzo19]

I LOVE MARTHA!!!

[lovesGenet]

thay r both aiming for completely diff thins. DePachmann .Listen to depach's middle voice rec is awful sound.Rosenthal also rec this and HSchon thought it a gem. DEPACH rarely moves me his tech is poor too but the greats of all time respected him.

Now, Argerich is just perfect playing and wonderful musically and fastidious neat exactitude. I wouldn't deign to compare anyone with her.like Richter,Gilels,Bolet ,Horowitz untouchable.

[COCOONFABULA]

To me it's definitly Martha the best

[troppofiato]

Argerich's interpretation is astounding. So much color, shape, and articulation - and at that speed!

[Liebromeistal]

I hate Martha Argerich's "banging"

[vitellia]

He just didn't practice enough; he should stick with the nocturnes.

[orcamocha]

Pachmann!

But Argerich is good too

[Villeggiatura]

Thanks for introducing Pachmann's, which differs toto caelo from the second.

[babyeinstein12]

IMO Pachmann had more touch

Argerich always makes things exciting, I love her.

[MACA1964]

Maybe the best Chopinist of 19th century.

It is difficult to compare: they are the opposite expressions of chopin.

And the instruments are so different too.We must take account of it!

Without contests i WOULD SAY BOTH EXCELLENT.

[brassmonkeyjew]

@MACA1964

Yes quite true! Back in the turn of the century-19th into 20th century- Pianists had far superior pianos to play on. No one can build a piano of the same caliber now a days. It's a lost art. :(

[themfromspace]

De Pachmann was the greatest Chopinist of the 20. century. Every phrase is carefully sculpted but he never forgets the breadth of the greater piece. Argerich simply cannot compare.

[deekk83]

please, argerich's interpretation is just excellent... i could listen to this 10 times over and not get bored. Anyone who says it's dull maybe hasn't listen to the CD. The quality of the sound is so much better. If you don't change your mind then... well, maybe a hearing aid?

[mdoub]

someone is very good at strumming the harp

[labuh1559]

Слава ТЕТЕРИН,муж Елены Евгеньевны ,этого Шопена играет ещё быстрее.Ногами!

[mdoub]

just the sheer volume of power argerich puts into the etude, and the COLOR, the inflections, perhaps excessive, nevertheless, is just beautiful and additively orgasmic to my ears

[etude12]

Pachmann's recording made me feel quite frustrated- it sounded labourious, and I couldn't help but feel a huge relief when Agerich started.

This comparison reminds me of practicing this piece; you play it slowly with odd accents until you get bored to tears, then you just play it full speed and get your frustration out.

[RabidCh]

The accents aren't odd. They're voices. The performance is a more literal hearkening back to Bach's WTC No. 1.

[etude12]

Well, I'm sure that Pachmann's rendition would be perfectly justifyable, were that Chopin's intention. Unfortunately, similar as you may find it to Bach's C maj prelude bk.1, the point of this Etude is to promote equal finger strength in the form of sweeping arpeggios, hence the concentration on strengthening the 5th finger (in SOME places!).

One should only bring out the voices where Chopin marked- that is why he put accents on only some notes, oddly enough! Otherwise, it sounds laboured.

[bluematrix109]

@etude12 yaaa...i was verry dissappointed when i heard De PAchmanns version as awell...considereing he's supposed to b one of the 'Best' Chopin players...hoever...tht being said..all i can appreciate is the control he has..but then again...we ALL should b mindful of tht when we practice...=p

[aardvaark069]

Interesting This is a comparison of polar opposites. Take your pick. As for me....I will have my cake and eat it too.

[scotttheconquerer]

First of all, if you read a little about Chopin as a pianist you'll learn that he did very little distortion to the rhythm; the pulse was always there. Jero, please try to listen again. Listen to the tops of the arpeggios, and you'll quickly see how varied they are in the distance from note to note in each arpeggio- then you'll see how every arpeggio is like that. I think the dialogue is very obvious- it's most prominent in the middle.

[scotttheconquerer]

But what I think you're misconstruing here is how each pianist approaches this. De Pachmann treats every arpeggio as its own phrase- each one is like a mountain that takes effort to climb (it gets tiresome and loses its potency), but Argerich thinks larger, and you'll see that she does play this romantically; it's just that the rubato isn't on a micro level. Each harmony leads to the next naturally. And when she actually pulls back, it's beautiful and unexpected and very satisfying.

[scotttheconquerer]

Last thing- not every note has to be a flower. This piece isn't about Romanticism and making it pretty. It's about being creative and ingenious within the confines of a repetitive passage; it's an etude in subtlety (which Argerich does laudably well), not Romanticism. Listen to her colors! Listen to her phrasing! Listen to the counterpoint and layered voicing! Listen to how she brings you along for a ride and doesn't force emotion on you. This interpretation is one of the best I've heard yet.

[scotttheconquerer]

Jero, listen closer to the Argerich. Note the flexibility within each arpeggio regarding the space between the notes- it varies, as does the color depending on register and location in the phrase. Also note the clever dialogue in the left hand, and the variance in phrase length and how it affects her articulation and color, and more importantly, how exactly it moves the music.

[jero13595]

Dear scotttheconquerer, unfortunately I do not hear any flexibility in Argerich's playing at all. Also, the "clever dialogue in the left hand" you were referring to is just a bunch of loud octaves played in a monotonous manner to me.

[rigel48]

OK jero13595, Pachmann has all the qualities for you, and Argerich none. I think that scotttheconquere gave you pertinent advises to appreciate Argerich's playing, but you are so mulish that even if Chopin himself told you how great is Argerich in this etude, you would try to find one of your specious argument to contradict him !

So please let stop here. This discussion has no issue.

[jero13595]

Dear rigel48, I shan't argue with you anymore either. PS: Chopin will never have liked Argerich's anti-romantic playing/

[caijpp]

What is scary here is that there are people who take subjectivism objectively, which defeats the whole purpose of subjectivism. Subjectivism on its own may be chaotic, but a blend of the two is just plain ugly.

[indigoblue555]

An unreal dimension,like dreaming of a magic fly to a nowhere world ....or a physical joy,a shining showing off of human genius and skill at its best....

On one day I could be listening to Pachmann and may be a few days later I could be mad for Argerich or Kempff...

Two sides of a heavenly masterpiece:thank you Fryderyk !

[alexongcs]

I favourited this because of Pachmann. Argerich is just a mechanical machine of no humaneness.

[indigoblue555]

to alexongcs - HI! I fully agree as I already did in my previous reply to your comments months ago.

But here I am wondering if(focused on this work)is it ever possible mating Pachman's expression with Argerich's highest eventhough vapid technique.I came across Berezovski and I

perceive his extreme virtuoso style not so

unexpressive or colourless as Argerich or

Askenazy.

Obviously personal taste rules...:)

[alexongcs]

I feel i rather sacrifice technique for expression. But still, I say Pachmann's technique is extremely gorgeous and personal, and it is only his technique which gives it this atmosphere.

[jero13595]

Dear indigoblue555, of the three, Argerich and Ashkenazy are equally dull, but Beresovsky is even worse than the 2 of them.

[indigoblue555]

to jero1395-I listen to all of these great soloists respectfully,but,Pachmann(on one side) Berezovsky and Gavrilov(on the opposite)

do impress me eventhough their playing is so different.

Fortunately personal taste rules..:)

[Sinfoniette]

I'm not too sure. I don't think Argerich is dull, though. Her playing is passionate at most times, in my opinion; however, I dislike her because it seems that she has no power (as in sound)-I think she plays too many pieces way to quiet. If it wasn't that, her Prokofiev 3 would be my favorite.

But still, I wouldn't rank her as "dull". And Berezovsky might be a little technichal, but...his Islamey is one of the best.

[RabidCh]

I don't get the high regard for Berezovsky's Islamey other than the highly percussive tone and technique.

[Sinfoniette]

What else is there for Islamey?

[RabidCh]

Simon Barere for old romantic/virtuoso interpretation.

Gavrilov I think is very impressive, and Bronfman for a slower tempo yet nicely harmonized. Horowitz is interesting too but he changes some notes so it's Balakirev-Horowitz if you can forgive him for that. I never took a liking to Gilels'.

[rigel48]

"No power" ! "she plays too many pieces way to quiet" !! Sinfoniette we have not the same ears ! Listen to her in the Tchaikovsky concerto no 1 or the Rachmaninoff no 3 for instance. And what about this etude !!

[Sinfoniette]

Yes, I suppose we have different ears... frankly, I haven't heard her Tchaikovsky, but her Rachmaninoff 3 isn't too god, in my opinion. It does not seem to have power as the Horowitz. And her Prokofiev 3; it sounds a little too rounded to me. I like my Prokofiev a little sharp and loud. :)

[rigel48]

Her Rach3 is one of the best available. Not so many play it with such fire and passion.

Now if you like loud and heavy piano playing, I can understand why you do not like Argerich.

[Sinfoniette]

It IS one of the best,but I still prefer Horowitz; sometimes, the orchestra drowns the best passages on the Rach. 3, in my opinion. But her softer playing is good at many parts of the Ravel.

[Sinfoniette]

Not saying that the Balakirev Islamey is a great piece, though. I'm saying that his technichal abilities shine in it. I wouldn't trust him for a Tchaikovsky Concerto, though.

[jero13595]

I AWARD PACHMANN 4 1/2 WATERFALLS AND ONLY 1 1/2 WATERFALL TO ARGERICH. The differences between the two pianistic generations are clearly evident here. While Pachmann's interpretation is genuinely 19th Century style (light touch, creative phrasing and accents), Argerich's performance is just typical 20th Century, objectivist sounding (unimaginative, dull, colourless, mechanical).

[jero13595]

Yes, it would be hard for a interpretation like Pachmann's to impress any competition jury nowadays, because people are simply blinded by the conservatoire style of teaching!

[alexongcs]

Correct.!!

[rigel48]

My dear Smith, you change your name but not your partiality !

I will not argue with you concerning Argerich's talent, for I know it is hopeless. However, it is so obvious when listening this etude that all what you say is wrong (unimaginative !! dull !! colourless !! mechanical !! ?) that your unfair opinion is completely discredited.

And sorry to say that, but who care about your WATERFALLS and others chocolate medals ?

[RabidCh]

rigel48, that is not smith but probably an admirer of his

[jero13595]

Hmm, how interesting... you seem to have mistaken me for my apparent mentor. Anyway, since you've decided not to argue with me, I shan't argue with you as well. HOWEVER, in what way is my judgement unfair and discredited compared to others who sing praises about Argerich and bash Pachmann? Besides, what's wrong with my style of rating? Is it because its less objectivist than just "clicking on the stars"?

[rigel48]

The problem jero13965 is not to praise or to bash Argerich or Pachmann (and I do not upload those 2 versions for that). The problem is to say anything when you describe Argerich's playing. The brigthness of her right hand arpeggios, the originality of her phrasing and her subtle shadings cannot be describe as "unimaginative, dull, colourless, mechanical", or you have not the slightness idea of what is great piano playing.

Concerning your style of rating I just find it self-centred.

[jero13595]

Dear rigel48, I will not deny that Argerich's arpeggios were strong and bright. However, in what way was her phrasing original? She plays this etude just like any other 20th century objectivist does - metronomic tempo, arpeggios and octaves of same volume throughout etc. Her playing just seems dull in comparison to Pachmann.

[alexongcs]

I like how you phrase this comment.

[flugelmaniac]

Ms Argerich's is mechanical and boring in character........nothing changes,it's just like all her other Chopin. Blandness reigns

supreme!

[rigel48]

Dear jero13965, I really think it is useless to argue with you. Always the same unfairness !

"metronomic tempo" : apart the difference of speed, both Pachmann and Argerich play at a rather constant tempo.

"arpeggio and octaves of same volume throughout" : you must be talking about Pachmann, for Argerich's range of dynamics is quite larger than Pachmann. Just listen !

Of course Pachmann is original, but Argerich in a more "classical" approach shows as much personality.

[jero13595]

Dear rigel48, yes Pachmann plays at a constant tempo as a whole. However, he varies his tempo and articulation within each phrase, creating a more flexible feel. Argerich on the other hand, plays all the notes with equal length, resulting in a stiff, mechanical sound. Regarding volume, dynamic range has nothing to do with this. Furthermore, the old recording of Pachmann is unable to capture his entire dynamic range compared to Argerich's modern recording.

[jero13595]

PS Smith's channel is called ClassicalMusicReview. To reach a land of interest and enchantment,paste the address at the bottom...

[rabengeraun]

Pachmann was known as an eccentric and this performance confirms it; ridiculously slow. Argerich, on the other hand is her ususal helter-skelter self. Richter and, to a lesser extent, Pollini understood the middle way betwwen these two extremes.

[Gnasherator]

But doesn't that suck, or at least get dangerously close to it, that we know that on some level Pachmann's recording is superior artistically, but we know not what art he followed in terms of style? It's like seeing an ancient Mayan pyramid, and knowing on some level its structure beats Frank Lloyd Wright, but because of a gross amount of time between, the eternal "why" goes to perdition, along with old Iron Maiden records, Alf show, and the Dead Sea Scrolls?

[hymntonight]

Agerich sure has the technique and the passion. But the Pachmann is simply on another, higher level of artistry.

[Cavaradossi1981]

What is the purpose of this video? In the same way you can compare for example the Violetta of Ponselle with that of Netrebko.Or Winterreise of Hotter and that of (the awful) Thomas Hampson.hahaha hihihi hehehe

[UKpiano]

I hate to say this but...I did not enjoy much from the first performance, and everything I wanted to hear from a performance of this piece, I got from the second by Argerich. 3:08 to 3:30 for example really does it for me!!! So brilliantly played, there is just no competition here. I want pace, daring, fireworks even, from this crazy piece, its sooooo hard to play technically!

[RabidCh]

Now the real trick is how to appreciate both...

[DualThunder]

agreed

[indigoblue555]

to RabidCh - you're right man ..that's the point !

[Sinfoniette]

Exactly. And sooner or later you will find a hidden gem you failed to find before.

[englishplayer40]

poetry is all well and good, but Pachmann is VERY VERY slow. (Maybe the speed is affected by the recording?) Standards have moved on, it would be hard for a interpretation like Pachmann's to impress any competition jury nowadays. Argerich is the opposite extreme - ferocious! - but is it really a 'ferocious' piece?

[antoinezygfryd]

Pachmann délivre la beauté de la virtuosité,Argerich fait l'inverse.

[indigoblue555]

Pachmann's rendition is all poetry -

charming listening,like flying in a kind of magic.

[kiitoob]

Argerich is great!...but fast?!

[parl0p]

I like then both in different ways. Argerich is so virtuoustic and fearless. Totally badass. When I listen to Pachmann's, I understand the weight between each note and the gravity of the arpeggios, like he's throwing a ball up in the air and catching it. It's beautiful!

[pyroprince78]

great analogy! yes--there is something buoyant and introspective about his playing

[Ligeti92]

Pachmann is infinitly better

[arthurmassucato]

Huahuahua

[laurion69]

It is true that Pachmann performs this studio slower than Argerich. But Pachmann does not plays wrong notes, Argerich does ;-)

[Achtelnote]

you should delete this video because the recording of pachmann is not in the right speed.there are more vids of him on youtube with the same mistake.

you can hear that his recording is far away from the right pitch and btw do you really think pachmann played so slow?at this time all pianists played enormous tempi.

[rigel48]

Sorry but this is taken from an official recording of V. de Pachmann. I think this is a very personal rendition of this etude with a deliberate slow tempo from the pianist.

[checkmatesolidier]

for what it's worth, pachmann's c is equal to the c of an a-440-tuned keyboard - just checked. you're certainly right about many videos on here having pitch off.

[whatsmylogin]

Nice idea to post 2 recordings for comparison. Apart from that, is Pachmann doing sightreading practice here? If not, the tempo mystifies me. He goes for a rather fast tempo with the Gb (black key) etude and it seems MORE nuanced than his 10/1 (albeit out of control).

[stan724]

The critic who humorously called this etude "a runaway chorale" wasn't far off the mark. If you reduce this to four-part writing and play it in chorale style you'll see that there is a great deal of variety and substance to this piece. And it should be played accordingly (my opinion) with meaning and nuance and dynamic variety. Zipping it off at breakneck speed with volcanic fury won't get it.

[reddoghud]

This is the one and only piece that Chopin wrote based off of a Bach piece... so you're not too far off the mark yourself in comparing it to a chorale.

[PuresMusic]

the only etude, not the only piece.

[AulicExclusiva]

Pachmann was born on 27 July, 1848, and Chopin died on October 17, 1849.

He plays a bit carefully but makes music out of this étude. He had poetry and style, even in his declining years.

Argerich sounds impulsive and violent; her performance is exciting but not expressive; she's all muscle. I found Pachmann infinitely more interesting.

[alexongcs]

I COMPLETELY AGREE. The latter is completely dull and boring, and commonplace. We need more imagination right now!

[lovesGenet]

I have over 20 complete versions of these etudes.pollini,Ashkenazy r not my faves.Lorie is wonderful as r most of the russians. Depachman supposedly could play all 24 in any key. Well at this tempo it is good music .Argerich plays every right hand note as strong but still lets the bass color music.I always love wht she does.rosenthal also rec this.Novaes is poetic.Cortot is Cortot.a few times a year i listen to him and am amazed at what is there .U have to mature to hear some things.

[nickus32000]

The debate of who's a better interpreter of this study is a moot point. These two pianist were born a hundred years apart and reflect completely different ideals. Chopin himself never played a piece the same way twice and always advocated different interpretations. For example he Liszt performance of these etudes to his own. Those who complety dismiss a famous pianist as a charlatan and over praise another are merely exposing there ignorance. I prefere Pachmann but only a little.

[mursum151]

This should be "Chopin etude op.10 no.1 by the master and _the_midipalyerlikerobot who doesn't have any ideas of making music.

[robshelrobshel]

Agreed.

[123mortimer]

What a contrast! Even knowing Cortot's interpretation, I would never have thought the kind of lyricism that Pachmann brings out could be found in this piece. It's a very strange rendition, but extremely interesting. Argerich's is by far the most brilliant, fiery, and exciting rendition I have ever heard. I had always thought Pollinis cool and majestic interpretation was the last word on op. 10 no. 1. Thanks for posting this and opening my eyes.

[astronomo16]

Argerich is better than Pachmann

[Frozentoes1]

Please define «better». Comparisons need to be made within a defined objective context. Otherwise, it's nothing more than personal taste which doesn't amount to a hill of beans. That is, an opinion is like a navel...everybody has one.

[astronomo16]

i think that argerich is better (pianist =) OK?

[Frozentoes1]

And you base your comment on what exactly? Why is Argerich better? What criteria do you use? What is (are) your objective measure(s)?

[astronomo16]

its a judgement aesthetic. I feel and I think that argerich has more energy and she´s a virtuosa pianist. She is able to transmit force. This interpretation by Pachman is boring, sorry. But as I said, is simply a judgement aesthetic, and you can think other thin, that is equally respectable. :) (sorry my english if i´ve got mistakes)

[datruzepp]

HAHAHAHA DA PACKMAN, JUZ

WTF!!!!

[smithsherman]

Further,I repsectfully disagree that this piece has plastered in concrete on it..."BRAVURA"...AS IT IS,It is A "bravura"

display of Lyricality.

[smithsherman]

To clarify...somehow over the past century "Etude' has become confused with

Physical to the exclusion of all else.

One may "Study"the interpetive aspects of this as well.

[Haeronthegreat]

Does this debate not boil down to the interpretation we each prefer? Therefore, personal taste, not objective reasoning?

[smithsherman]

No,it boils down to the fact that I disagree with the narrowness with which you regard the Etude and it's function in cultural life.

If you dislike the playing here for any reason(you're used to colorless mechanus like Ashkenazy for one)I will debate it,if it seems that you're slighting it...on any ground beyond taste.

[smithsherman]

Because for me,the primary issue that roils me is this constant narrow preoccupation with technique and diminshment of expression for 1001 reasons that has been creating a classical culture over the last 100 years of vapidity.

[Haeronthegreat]

I think Pachmann removes the point of the piece with his pointlessly slow, 'lyrical' playing. It is a concert Etude, not a lyric piece.

[smithsherman]

99% of perfromers agree with you...that's why we're inundated in etude-like performances

...even for Balladi,Sonati,Mazurki,and just about everything else.Most musicians simply are...Etudes.

[Haeronthegreat]

There's just one problem. This IS an etude, and should therefore be played as such. For the Ballades, I have certain performances I like... I'm not a fan of Martha's, she takes the coda too fast. Ashkenazy's recording is my favourite.

I think some performers do play too fast, and it's unfortunate, but that's just their taste. We all have our own taste. There is no absolutely correct interpretation of any piece. However, there are certain standards, (cont.)

[Haeronthegreat]

such as playing the first etude at a tempo at which it does not sound like a rehearsal, more like the showy concert etude that it is. It is a bravura piece, one of Chopin's few. Playing it like de Pachmann just seems to remove any hint of that.

[smithsherman]

There is no problem,because "Etude" by a 19th century definition was not an subject to any special status different from other musical pieces when used for recital.You're thinking

of the Function that "Etude" has at home,when attempting to expand any aspect of interpretive,articulative,and or physical technique.But then any piece,or section

of a piece,can be serve as this.

[francorussie]

Never was an admirer of Argerich, but the seond (her) interpretation is beautiful and convincing. Good!

[alexongcs]

I guess what vladimir is trying to get here is lyricism with the etude. I think it's bravo! Beautiful.

[alexongcs]

I guess what vladimir is trying to get here is lyricism with the etude. I think it's bravo! Beautiful.

[ieronim2003]

vladimir's version looks like practice Martha owns this etude

[sagalat]

Pachman's stark, almost serene interpretation, his obsessive differentiation of each note and spare reliance on pedal, some may consider it unemotional, even dumbed-down, especially compared with Richter's magnificent savagery; itself almost identical to Martha's rendition. Superb posting, Bravi!

[smithsherman]

IT'S SCARY HOW VLADIMIR BURIES MARTHA SO COMPLETELY THAT THERE ISN'T EVEN A DUST TRAIL.

Martha's could be anyone of a hundred like Ashkenzy's.But Vladimir's is like ...no one else's.The sheer vocality and revelation of Vladimirs left hand is remarkable...while Martha has beautiful execution...and few ideas.

[alexongcs]

I completely agree! I think nowadays we lack "ideas", best examples of pianists with great visions/ideas, are vladimir pachmannn, horowitz, cziffra, ain't it? :)

[smithsherman]

Dear Alex,We lack ideas today because of the Great Anti-expressionist Objectivist Revisionist revolution of the 20th century which stated...(you,"the musician"must remove yourself and play only the literal printed notes with beautiful tone and perfect execution...anything else is...heresy)...What lunacy!

[alexongcs]

Oh, really?! Can you tell me who started it? It's so sad to hear all this crap on 'following the page'. And why was it sooo successful in brainwashing so many pianists today who just 'follow the rules'? Everybody nowadays does what 'is needed' and doesn't "go deeper" anymore. Our creativity has just simply become sterile. I've been playing the piano and many are against my practice of 'expressionism', only some appreciating it.

[smithsherman]

Alex,It's a complex social phenomenon.1st

let's acknowledge there have always been dry metronomic players.2nd.With the rise of Conservatories in the mid 19th century,the Anti-Romantic reaction of the late 19th century,The Rise of Musicology as a new field & The rise of Objectivism in civilization created a situation by WWI,where The new Critical Establishment attacked any unliteral performance

[smithsherman]

One sees a clear change in the playing from performers born before 1870 to the way those born after 1900 played.This reflects changes in society which now created a new kind of Artist that would respect a score as the "literal" composer's wish .(The most important things according to modernity).

Performers like Paderewski,Pachmann,& D'Albert

became rare & their style of expressive individual play was seen as anathema to good Western values

[fredslu]

I agree very strongly!

[K189T]

very differents versions, but interesting, every one has its own conception.

[bw2082]

he sounds like an amateur compared to her as far as technique

[chad410]

Pachman used to look at his audience but how could he in this.

[3cplantin]

Great to have these two. Please collect more this way!

[fdartmouth]

Wow, aside from the obvious differences in sound quality over the 3/4 century, Marta kicks ass!