I feel like this performance could have a bit more fire - some of the quick passages should have been taken at a true allegro. But it's still a sincere and beautiful effort.
brendel is probably among the very most informed piano players. his historic and musical knowledge is vast.
his writing style in his musical essays is excellent and are probably the best musical essays i have read so far! i don't know any pianist who digs that deeps into his material as he does. of course he isn't always the best interpreter, but the most rational, never the wrong choice to listen to!
a magisterial performance. Even if you can't accept his interpretation, you have to admire his straightforward no cheap rubatos finely thought out performance. the coda was marvelous. The three-time-spoken episodes even make sense. Has anyone ever noticed the tick he has in his throat? When he's playing an intense melody it seems to enunciate each note!
I'm so used to the romantic passion of Arrau and Bolet's interpretation, but this is very interesting, more modern view. Like an b/w etching to contrast Arrau's flowing oil portrait.
I don't know what score you have, but his interpretation is pretty accurate to mine. Furthermore, I do play the piece (not as well as Brendel), so I know what I am talking about.
I'm discovering Liszt's music, and i've not been moved by this piece ( first audition , for me it's normal), but i can relate with the end !wow, great !
Now what exactly is that supposed to mean?? Heavy Metal is not as good as "Classical Music"?? I enjoy Heavy Metal just as much as this, but what is it with devoted fans of classical music that makes them think that theirs is so much better than other types of music.. so called, "rytmic music".Musical prejudice sickens me.
it was in reply to aldebussy,i've nothing against heavy metal [some is good] but a lot is predictable riffs [unlike this sonata]i am not a musical snob and have an eclectic taste in music
and those who aren't fans of classical music think this music sucks, boring, and fans of classical music are so insulted too, we all hate Musical Prejudice.... *cries, I'm a fan of Classical music too...
odoenov is correct. Brendel simplifies in many places. But you have to ask yourself: who cares? When he plays the piece with such understanding and such conviction, personally I'm prepared to let a few cheated octaves slide. i don't think that this was one of the pieces that Liszt wrote as a vehicle for his own virtuosity. Brendel shows us Liszt's greatness as a composer
Brendel and his tricks! Of course it is much easier to play this piece removing tremolos, transforming broken chords,... Anyway, i prefer this version to Berman's one.
"Brendel and his tricks"? what tricks are those man? Brendel neither adds nor removes musical notations... tell me the place so i can look it up on the original score.
Of course this version is better than Berman´s which in fact proves little competition.
Uhmmm....i will take care on the score ...despite i hate this work, but if Brendekl make those tricks, could be maybe owed to his technical limitations (which are not to many, but he is far than a virtuoso) I was observing carefuly hos playing, and what saves him, is he have a long thumb. Long thumb is always a very good help, despite you have good or bad technique. It avoids too much lateral movement of the hands. I never observed his octaves carefully. he plays it very stiff.
He has pretty big hands and thus, much weight on them. I don´t know you ytpiano7, but here, i can see that despite the "stiff octaves" his playing is crystal clear. This performance is even clearer than those of liszt´s pupils. Take in mind the piece´s difficulty. I wouldn´t believe an absolutely stiffless technique from beginning to end. I can send you his b minor sonata btw; really outstanding to me.
His playing is very clear. I never complaint about that .That caracteristic is among his good things. But much weigth on them is not true . To play louder octaves( in his case) he has to use a stiff forearm conected with his arm, becuase he is sitting too high. On the contrary side, if he play with a relatively low bench, he can play a very relax octaves without conecting the forearm with the arm, so he hangs instead to push. For this reason not only him but most pianists who play "High" contin
continuing... have the same problem. Ahh in this way of playing, the pienist use just teh weigth of the arm + forearm. In the other way the pianist doesn´t use any weight, just the "Force" which comes form the pushing. More pushing, more loudness. The body weight is just an irrational and phisycally impossible thing. It is just one of the points of terrible ignorance concerning piano technique, The body weight is 90% on the derrier (on the bench) and the other 10% on the feet to continue..
continuing...it menas ( on the floor ); of course finally all the body weight (Bench + feet) remain on the floor. But that 100% has a "Discount" which is the weight (when yuou played comletelly realxed) of arms + forearms. So Real weight on piano = Arms +forearms. Real weight on the floor = (Bench + feet) - (forearms + Arms) . Technique is cerebral and objetive. Not subjetive. I don´t bnlame people for the unknowledge of this. But i blame people when they begin ti understand..to vontinue..
coninuing... something, but their "Self proud" doesn´t allow them to investigate more and them just have the argument: My teacher is superb.. or was superb. Of course the teacher who in the 21 century teach with the saem aproach of 2 centuries ago. That´s the sad true. The wrong notion of the body weight is one of the "Fantastic tales" who still reamin in the bagage of maybe 90% of pianists today.
I agree. But, what is technique´s main perpose? To get a clear sound. So if he is comfortable with it, he is not doing any bad.
On the other hand, he doesn´t play with a high bench; he is very tall (1m 85cm more or less). Also, he bends forward and sits on the bench´s end, to redistribute weight. That is very good, as you can really have a different gravity center, therefore giving the forearms and hands more weight.
His bench could high or not. I was writing it in rlative terms. If he is very tall, he could use a very low chair. The point is toi have your elbows not over the level of keyborad. He play very high. On the other hand is NO WAY to give mor weight to the arms and forearmas if you are sitting high, or too low to. If you make just a drawing of forces who act to some specific point, you will realize the point of more efficeincy is..to continue..
conintuing..is when the "weight" hit the "Surface to be hit" in an angle of 90 degrees. it is exactly when you have your elbow at the same level of the keyboard. Of course human amres and forearms contained may more small elements who make this posiion not exactly in 100% . For their reason pianists with real great techniques never ploay at the same high, BUT very similar. Most of them close to the level of keyboard. Piano technique is too complex. t continue..
coninuing.... and her we are just talking about highness. What about the distance of the body to the piano? . What about how the fingers should be move? etc. ? It is a very complex theme. Brendel technique is not bad. If you compare with Yundi li technique (wich is very bad), Brendel technque is superior, but is far to be among the great pianist monsters. BUT for the way he makes music is good and enough, That is a different story. And his sound is very clear.
I´m sorry ytpiano7, but if you stand up and then bend forward, then your gravity center changes. This way, your torso will get more influenced by gravity. The same happens when you sit down and bend forward. However, Brendel really plays the piano with his fingers in a 90 degree angle from a key perspective. Argerich, meanwhile, plays with her fingers almost completely stretched up.
Wrong. It´s just vritual not real, becuase if you do that you have to make one piece your farearm with your arm . It menas tension. If you play in high position, and with a complete relaxed forearm independent of the arm, you can not generate any storke on the key or just no more than a "Pianisimo". More higher position , more "Pressure" and more stiffness. Concerning fingers i was not talking about a 90 degree with the keyboard. tocoontinue...
continuing.....I was talking about 90 degree the forearm with the keyborad. FIngers in the most natural position, it means the position they have when you have your armm relaxed when you are walking. The same position of fingers is the best to play. If you play wwith your fingers making an angle of 90 degree with the keyboard, you cannot move foingers, but just push them with the whole hand, forearm and some amount of the arm. That is the terrible postition Arrau use a lot when was young.
You said "the surface to be hit (keys) in an angle of 90 degrees (fingers)". However, there is no point in this. The only thing that matters is finger-only movement. Provided you play with your fingers/wrist the height is bla bla.
On another note, you criticized his dynamic range: take a look from 7:20-8:10 and particularly from there to 8:30-8:49.
I´ve never heard a better interp. of that subito piano at 8:30.
Sorry . It´s not bla bla bla. Not one of the greatest pianist Really great technicians play using "Pushing arms" Observe Michelangelli, Argerich, Rubinstein, Horowitz ( sometimes he did), Pollini, Goulda, etc. They use "Only fingers" and the "Weight" is from the hand when playing PP, more sound? : The forearms. More sound? The froearms + the arms. And to use that weigt without tension you need to have your elbow around the same height of the keyboard level ..to continue...
contionuing... of course a littl higher...a littel lower.... The ideal should be to play about some ten to fifteen centimeters under the keyboard level, in that way you use better the arms weight, and also any palying very digital , gets easy, BUT the probelm comes when you have to play many chords or a sccesive octaves. You have to lift you arm for every stroke, and so you get tired very soon. For that reason elbows at keyboard height is a good reference. Rubinstein use to play to continue...
continuing...hogher than Horowitz. Horowitz a littel lower than Pollini. Pollini a littel lower than Argerich. But Argerich little lower than Rubinstein. Michelangelli is at the middle. A very good an logical position you can observe in Amaral Vieira, Just i sent to Ernesto a comment about him.
Well. i will read all oof you in some 20 days or more.
I mean, cohesive as in having a vision of the piece as a whole, since it is a sonata. I feel Brendel emphasizes mini-climaxes too much as to detract the listener from the larger ones. Bolet on the other hand constructs a bridge, so to speak, across the entire piece. (It really is hard to articulate in words.) Freedom and cohesion are clearly not mutually exclusive. In fact, they in some ways support each other.
I'm not sure if Liszt wrote about a journey through hell because there are clearly angelic, heavenly motifs in the piece. I believe Dante's Divine Comedy as a whole--hell, purgatory, heaven--gave Liszt the inspiration to write this piece, which I am now learning (and will put up a video of, if circumstances allow).
I'd be interested to see it. I'm working on it too, after being inspired by Nyiregyhazi's live recording. Have you heard his recording (there's a link to the page on a film of him playing on my account).
Nyiregyhazi's recording is very messy because he hadn't practised in years and you have to forgive a lot, but I feel that his vision of the piece is supreme. There's nothing 'cohesive' about it in the slightest. He exaggerates the contrasts between the diabolical and the sweet (as you say it's not all evil). Liszt invented 'thematic transformation', not 'thematic consistency' and I believe he was more interested in contrasts than in a smooth path.
What is he doing 2:23 by the way? Is this in any edition? It's not like Brendel to change the text. I quite like the idea but I wouldn't do it until those same bars come for the third time (I also double the bass there, because it's too much to have the same a 3rd time). Why is everyone so fast at the bit 7:22 in? It always sounds like a cheap dance. Surely there should be a massive struggle there?
thank you for sharing this. I especially liked how he lengthens the phrase from 0:46 to 1:00. Yes, everything's good except for the end when his facial expressions ruined the mood and made me lol.
Well, actually, I find this interpretation a bit boring, whithout relief.. I prefer the Affanasiev one, but unfortunately very difficult to find.. ! Would Argerich have played it !!
Definitely. Brendel may not be a furious pianistic monster, but he surely is a mature, wonderful musician. These pieces couldn't have been played better than this.
So beautiful, it almost causes pain. Now this is Liszt played by someone who not only has fingers, but also a brain and imagination! Thanks so much for this!
not so beautiful performance... the greatest is Lazar Berman
newFranzFerencLiszt 3 months ago
My all time Fav piece,
It´s Truly inspiring me
Suraj7Ambika 9 months ago
With Brendel, one can understand the real depth of Liszt's works. You forget about virtuosity, and you listen to MUSIC. Thank you, Alfred...
peixotoraul 1 year ago 3
nyiregyhazi is incredible in this.
kasyapa 1 year ago
I feel like this performance could have a bit more fire - some of the quick passages should have been taken at a true allegro. But it's still a sincere and beautiful effort.
lister1nePaz 1 year ago
Wonderful! thanks for posting this...
carles03 1 year ago
Brendel always takes a unique approach towards Liszt. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I do not, but here I absolutely love it.
The Paradiso is more exquisite and less cathartic than in most performances...which provides a lovely effect, in my opinion.
SlyFox616 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
SlyFox616 2 years ago
Danke shön,
aus Japan he is one of my favorite pianist! M the gray
diveraki 2 years ago
Wow! A wonderful performance.
ephaistion 2 years ago 2
brendel is probably among the very most informed piano players. his historic and musical knowledge is vast.
his writing style in his musical essays is excellent and are probably the best musical essays i have read so far! i don't know any pianist who digs that deeps into his material as he does. of course he isn't always the best interpreter, but the most rational, never the wrong choice to listen to!
jackewiebohne 2 years ago 5
a magisterial performance. Even if you can't accept his interpretation, you have to admire his straightforward no cheap rubatos finely thought out performance. the coda was marvelous. The three-time-spoken episodes even make sense. Has anyone ever noticed the tick he has in his throat? When he's playing an intense melody it seems to enunciate each note!
sorobji 2 years ago 4
I agree it is a magisterial performance. His playing is natural and unaffected. No distortion of tempi here.
concerto35 2 years ago 3
I'm so used to the romantic passion of Arrau and Bolet's interpretation, but this is very interesting, more modern view. Like an b/w etching to contrast Arrau's flowing oil portrait.
opportunityforgrowth 2 years ago 2
what do you think of the volodos upload of this piece
Jerrez 2 years ago
DIVINO!
massimiliano123123 2 years ago 5
This is truly beautiful.
pinkmemories 2 years ago 6
un grande pianista sa suonare ogni cosa!!!!!e lo sa fare divinamente!!
lisztbest 2 years ago 3
good . but this makes brandel more specialist at Beethoven I think .
DennisChoy1 2 years ago
I've always known Alfred Brendel for his Schubert and Beethoven, but now it seems that he was born to play Liszt.
So beautiful...
Scherzo567 3 years ago 8
Intellect married to virtuosity, Maestro Brendel, likewise Maestro Liszt
zamyrabyrd 3 years ago 2
That's one explosive marriage, indeed.
FABrendel 3 years ago
Fireworks!!!
zamyrabyrd 3 years ago
Take the score. He is faking his way through the piece, this isn't even an acceptable rendition.
Boooooooo
odoenov 3 years ago
I don't know what score you have, but his interpretation is pretty accurate to mine. Furthermore, I do play the piece (not as well as Brendel), so I know what I am talking about.
zamyrabyrd 3 years ago 2
i'd say that guy did a pretty good job! :) He does spasm as if enduring a punishing orgasm at the end though... A+
DW282828 3 years ago 3
oops, too late, moved to tears ( 9.22)
tchebinai71 3 years ago
I'm discovering Liszt's music, and i've not been moved by this piece ( first audition , for me it's normal), but i can relate with the end !wow, great !
though it's brendel gaze ...
tchebinai71 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This sonata is SO predictable...
aldebussy 3 years ago
if you are not moved by this piece i suggest listening to heavy metal
afertyus1000 3 years ago
Now what exactly is that supposed to mean?? Heavy Metal is not as good as "Classical Music"?? I enjoy Heavy Metal just as much as this, but what is it with devoted fans of classical music that makes them think that theirs is so much better than other types of music.. so called, "rytmic music".Musical prejudice sickens me.
AndreasLuna 3 years ago 2
it was in reply to aldebussy,i've nothing against heavy metal [some is good] but a lot is predictable riffs [unlike this sonata]i am not a musical snob and have an eclectic taste in music
afertyus1000 3 years ago
and those who aren't fans of classical music think this music sucks, boring, and fans of classical music are so insulted too, we all hate Musical Prejudice.... *cries, I'm a fan of Classical music too...
SIlentPianist47 3 years ago
odoenov is correct. Brendel simplifies in many places. But you have to ask yourself: who cares? When he plays the piece with such understanding and such conviction, personally I'm prepared to let a few cheated octaves slide. i don't think that this was one of the pieces that Liszt wrote as a vehicle for his own virtuosity. Brendel shows us Liszt's greatness as a composer
lecomptedelalune 3 years ago 2
If you don't like it, then don't watch the video. You've no place in this argument.
ExVash 3 years ago
thx for posting!
by the way i'm reading right now the divine comedy by dante and it's AMAZING I realy recomend it :)
uo12345678910 4 years ago 2
Brendel and his tricks! Of course it is much easier to play this piece removing tremolos, transforming broken chords,... Anyway, i prefer this version to Berman's one.
capicap100 4 years ago
"Brendel and his tricks"? what tricks are those man? Brendel neither adds nor removes musical notations... tell me the place so i can look it up on the original score.
Of course this version is better than Berman´s which in fact proves little competition.
FABrendel 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Uhmmm....i will take care on the score ...despite i hate this work, but if Brendekl make those tricks, could be maybe owed to his technical limitations (which are not to many, but he is far than a virtuoso) I was observing carefuly hos playing, and what saves him, is he have a long thumb. Long thumb is always a very good help, despite you have good or bad technique. It avoids too much lateral movement of the hands. I never observed his octaves carefully. he plays it very stiff.
ytpiano7
ytpiano7 4 years ago
He has pretty big hands and thus, much weight on them. I don´t know you ytpiano7, but here, i can see that despite the "stiff octaves" his playing is crystal clear. This performance is even clearer than those of liszt´s pupils. Take in mind the piece´s difficulty. I wouldn´t believe an absolutely stiffless technique from beginning to end. I can send you his b minor sonata btw; really outstanding to me.
FABrendel 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
His playing is very clear. I never complaint about that .That caracteristic is among his good things. But much weigth on them is not true . To play louder octaves( in his case) he has to use a stiff forearm conected with his arm, becuase he is sitting too high. On the contrary side, if he play with a relatively low bench, he can play a very relax octaves without conecting the forearm with the arm, so he hangs instead to push. For this reason not only him but most pianists who play "High" contin
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
continuing... have the same problem. Ahh in this way of playing, the pienist use just teh weigth of the arm + forearm. In the other way the pianist doesn´t use any weight, just the "Force" which comes form the pushing. More pushing, more loudness. The body weight is just an irrational and phisycally impossible thing. It is just one of the points of terrible ignorance concerning piano technique, The body weight is 90% on the derrier (on the bench) and the other 10% on the feet to continue..
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
continuing...it menas ( on the floor ); of course finally all the body weight (Bench + feet) remain on the floor. But that 100% has a "Discount" which is the weight (when yuou played comletelly realxed) of arms + forearms. So Real weight on piano = Arms +forearms. Real weight on the floor = (Bench + feet) - (forearms + Arms) . Technique is cerebral and objetive. Not subjetive. I don´t bnlame people for the unknowledge of this. But i blame people when they begin ti understand..to vontinue..
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
coninuing... something, but their "Self proud" doesn´t allow them to investigate more and them just have the argument: My teacher is superb.. or was superb. Of course the teacher who in the 21 century teach with the saem aproach of 2 centuries ago. That´s the sad true. The wrong notion of the body weight is one of the "Fantastic tales" who still reamin in the bagage of maybe 90% of pianists today.
ytpiano7
ytpiano7 4 years ago
I agree. But, what is technique´s main perpose? To get a clear sound. So if he is comfortable with it, he is not doing any bad.
On the other hand, he doesn´t play with a high bench; he is very tall (1m 85cm more or less). Also, he bends forward and sits on the bench´s end, to redistribute weight. That is very good, as you can really have a different gravity center, therefore giving the forearms and hands more weight.
FABrendel 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry but here you are comp`letely wrong.
His bench could high or not. I was writing it in rlative terms. If he is very tall, he could use a very low chair. The point is toi have your elbows not over the level of keyborad. He play very high. On the other hand is NO WAY to give mor weight to the arms and forearmas if you are sitting high, or too low to. If you make just a drawing of forces who act to some specific point, you will realize the point of more efficeincy is..to continue..
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
conintuing..is when the "weight" hit the "Surface to be hit" in an angle of 90 degrees. it is exactly when you have your elbow at the same level of the keyboard. Of course human amres and forearms contained may more small elements who make this posiion not exactly in 100% . For their reason pianists with real great techniques never ploay at the same high, BUT very similar. Most of them close to the level of keyboard. Piano technique is too complex. t continue..
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
coninuing.... and her we are just talking about highness. What about the distance of the body to the piano? . What about how the fingers should be move? etc. ? It is a very complex theme. Brendel technique is not bad. If you compare with Yundi li technique (wich is very bad), Brendel technque is superior, but is far to be among the great pianist monsters. BUT for the way he makes music is good and enough, That is a different story. And his sound is very clear.
ytpiano7
ytpiano7 4 years ago
I´m sorry ytpiano7, but if you stand up and then bend forward, then your gravity center changes. This way, your torso will get more influenced by gravity. The same happens when you sit down and bend forward. However, Brendel really plays the piano with his fingers in a 90 degree angle from a key perspective. Argerich, meanwhile, plays with her fingers almost completely stretched up.
FABrendel 4 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Wrong. It´s just vritual not real, becuase if you do that you have to make one piece your farearm with your arm . It menas tension. If you play in high position, and with a complete relaxed forearm independent of the arm, you can not generate any storke on the key or just no more than a "Pianisimo". More higher position , more "Pressure" and more stiffness. Concerning fingers i was not talking about a 90 degree with the keyboard. tocoontinue...
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
continuing.....I was talking about 90 degree the forearm with the keyborad. FIngers in the most natural position, it means the position they have when you have your armm relaxed when you are walking. The same position of fingers is the best to play. If you play wwith your fingers making an angle of 90 degree with the keyboard, you cannot move foingers, but just push them with the whole hand, forearm and some amount of the arm. That is the terrible postition Arrau use a lot when was young.
ytpiano7 4 years ago
You said "the surface to be hit (keys) in an angle of 90 degrees (fingers)". However, there is no point in this. The only thing that matters is finger-only movement. Provided you play with your fingers/wrist the height is bla bla.
On another note, you criticized his dynamic range: take a look from 7:20-8:10 and particularly from there to 8:30-8:49.
I´ve never heard a better interp. of that subito piano at 8:30.
FABrendel 4 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Sorry . It´s not bla bla bla. Not one of the greatest pianist Really great technicians play using "Pushing arms" Observe Michelangelli, Argerich, Rubinstein, Horowitz ( sometimes he did), Pollini, Goulda, etc. They use "Only fingers" and the "Weight" is from the hand when playing PP, more sound? : The forearms. More sound? The froearms + the arms. And to use that weigt without tension you need to have your elbow around the same height of the keyboard level ..to continue...
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
contionuing... of course a littl higher...a littel lower.... The ideal should be to play about some ten to fifteen centimeters under the keyboard level, in that way you use better the arms weight, and also any palying very digital , gets easy, BUT the probelm comes when you have to play many chords or a sccesive octaves. You have to lift you arm for every stroke, and so you get tired very soon. For that reason elbows at keyboard height is a good reference. Rubinstein use to play to continue...
ytpiano7 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
continuing...hogher than Horowitz. Horowitz a littel lower than Pollini. Pollini a littel lower than Argerich. But Argerich little lower than Rubinstein. Michelangelli is at the middle. A very good an logical position you can observe in Amaral Vieira, Just i sent to Ernesto a comment about him.
Well. i will read all oof you in some 20 days or more.
ytpiano7
ytpiano7 4 years ago
why he looks like afraid at the end?(when he looks at the righthand side)
Tiszt 4 years ago
i love it..thanks for the upload ^_^
xXbookwormXx 4 years ago
Bolet's playing of this piece, imo, is more cohesive.
AllUserNamesTaken111 4 years ago
Liszt writes a journey through hell and you want 'cohesion'? Why? I think there is room for far more freedom than here.
cziffra1980 4 years ago
I mean, cohesive as in having a vision of the piece as a whole, since it is a sonata. I feel Brendel emphasizes mini-climaxes too much as to detract the listener from the larger ones. Bolet on the other hand constructs a bridge, so to speak, across the entire piece. (It really is hard to articulate in words.) Freedom and cohesion are clearly not mutually exclusive. In fact, they in some ways support each other.
AllUserNamesTaken111 4 years ago
I'm not sure if Liszt wrote about a journey through hell because there are clearly angelic, heavenly motifs in the piece. I believe Dante's Divine Comedy as a whole--hell, purgatory, heaven--gave Liszt the inspiration to write this piece, which I am now learning (and will put up a video of, if circumstances allow).
AllUserNamesTaken111 4 years ago
I'd be interested to see it. I'm working on it too, after being inspired by Nyiregyhazi's live recording. Have you heard his recording (there's a link to the page on a film of him playing on my account).
cziffra1980 4 years ago
Nyiregyhazi's recording is very messy because he hadn't practised in years and you have to forgive a lot, but I feel that his vision of the piece is supreme. There's nothing 'cohesive' about it in the slightest. He exaggerates the contrasts between the diabolical and the sweet (as you say it's not all evil). Liszt invented 'thematic transformation', not 'thematic consistency' and I believe he was more interested in contrasts than in a smooth path.
cziffra1980 4 years ago
What is he doing 2:23 by the way? Is this in any edition? It's not like Brendel to change the text. I quite like the idea but I wouldn't do it until those same bars come for the third time (I also double the bass there, because it's too much to have the same a 3rd time). Why is everyone so fast at the bit 7:22 in? It always sounds like a cheap dance. Surely there should be a massive struggle there?
cziffra1980 4 years ago
secondo me brendel dovrebbe limitarsi a suonare mozart... e riprendere anche un pò l'Hanon
gianbattista83 4 years ago
holy cow, such big hands.
AllUserNamesTaken111 4 years ago
malla brandel ka3ba mouch normal
dindan4 4 years ago
Wackiest fingering ever in 1:27 onwards, but Brendel pulls it off, the piece is played magically.
fronternijenzonka 5 years ago
regular....
scriabyn 5 years ago
lol... you had better?
plainerthanjane 4 years ago
thank you for sharing this. I especially liked how he lengthens the phrase from 0:46 to 1:00. Yes, everything's good except for the end when his facial expressions ruined the mood and made me lol.
donjuan9012 5 years ago
je je .... you are right
davidf996 5 years ago
Well, actually, I find this interpretation a bit boring, whithout relief.. I prefer the Affanasiev one, but unfortunately very difficult to find.. ! Would Argerich have played it !!
PHILBXL 4 years ago
It's so touching, especially at 6:47, my favorite moment of the piece.
pianofan86 5 years ago
It's good to be a furious pianistic monster as long as you play with the maturity that Brendel certainly has.
dnephi 5 years ago 2
Hehe..he cheats @2:22+ :-D
Very nice performance.
w3sp 5 years ago
Definitely. Brendel may not be a furious pianistic monster, but he surely is a mature, wonderful musician. These pieces couldn't have been played better than this.
shilloshillos 5 years ago 3
So beautiful, it almost causes pain. Now this is Liszt played by someone who not only has fingers, but also a brain and imagination! Thanks so much for this!
emtube 5 years ago 3
bravo emtube
gojyt5762 5 years ago 3
wonderful
DaComme 5 years ago 2
This is very nice. Brendel always brings a nice sound to his pieces.
cowheadcow 5 years ago 2