Martha Argerich plays Brahms Rhapsody in B minor

[Melbournei]

simply brilliant.... ah that melody, wish it was longer...

[donutopo22]

ella es simplemete de otro planeta! :D

[willrobinson1229]

Love this. Argerich never lets any piece flounder. Her playing always makes the composition fly and sing like a great piece of poetry.

[willrobinson1229]

Also, if I'm not mistaken this piece is in cut time, making the "rushing" quality of her interpretation a very good choice.

[Jaybeann]

The tempo marking at the beginning is "Agitato" and that's how she's playing it. I'm sure everyone who's commented on the speed knows exactly how fast Brahms wanted it. How about you go listen to those recordings of him playing it again? ... Oh wait.

[zoop1100]

@Jaybeann if you look at pictures of brahms in his later life, you would see that he was quite large... he wrote these rhapsody's at this time in his life, so i would guess that tempo of the piece would mimic his waist size and Brahms himself wouldnt be able to play that fast either because of his heaviness

[Jaybeann]

@zoop1100 In principle, weight affecting playing speed sounds intelligent, but I have a professor at college who is certainly heavier than Brahms was (from what I've seen in those pictures), yet she plays like a beast. From hearing her play, I have no doubt she could play this piece as fast as Argerich. I think it's silly to believe that Brahms couldn't play this fast because he was heavy. I'm not saying he played it this fast... I have no idea. I'm just saying it's a bad premise.

[MoovCren]

a las 6 personas que no los agrado esto....

SE IRAN AL INFIERNO

O_o >_>

[senar1940]

For pete' sake! This is way too fast, lack of concentration...automatic pilot, and

objections might be made. Lets not start to state this is 'Argerich' the 'Colossal' or

more of that shit...they dont want to be famous themselves, strongly resent that! She opens like a bewildered chessplayer who stumbles on the board

with silly gestures, thinking this will impress on the audience. NO! It is frustrating,

avoid of meaning or phrasing...its Culture i want...colors...sculpture, vision!!

Ergerich!!

[chrish12345]

hear those awful tempo changes, dear me. Plus its flashy in a non-Brahmsian way

[kyleclef]

I know its kind of fast, but you can kind of groove to it, she is a genius, with a sense of humour too.

[Mooweedy]

Alexjr1543 also being a pianist, I beg to differ with your statement. I'm graduating from a university with cum laude honors.

[frankthatank0325]

man i really wish i could have seen this live!

[forgottenbooks]

Some passages remind me of Alkan's Grand Sonata.

[forgottenbooks]

Opinions of this performance may differ, but to me, it would be significant to mention that after listening to this, I completely changed my opinion about Brahms being an overrated composer.

[ilfulo]

@forgottenbooks

It takes quite a bit of audacity to think of Brahms as an "overrated composer"... quite the opposite, frankly...!

[annaclementine]

this is awesome, Argerich is really talented

[Mooweedy]

Pianists are extrememly smart

[Alexjr1543]

@Mooweedy Being a pianist, I beg to differ with that statement.

[TomBarrister]

Martha Argerich's technique was often compared to that of Vladimiir Horowitz. This work sounds the way it does because that's the way she wants it to sound.

"Better" is subjective; it's in the mind of the listener. If you like somebody else better, that's fine, but it's your opinion, not the Gospel. What you're listening to now is masterful, even if it doesn't suit your preferences.

[Pirotechnik1995]

I think Radu Lupu plays it better, he is made for Brahms music. This version of Brahms is just ok.

[persianchick28]

once, i was sitting down at a piano, just fooling around, and my friend came up and asked if she could play. she then sat down and played this. after that, i couldn't touch a piano because i could never play something as beautiful. 

[linux1962]

When I heard this recording for the first time, I listened to details. Hmm, I play this bar differently, I don't like that bit...

Then I listened to amateur recordings of this piece; next again to Martha Argerich. I suddenly appreciated her playing much more. This is about *music*. I may or may not agree with everything she does, but she has musical authority. She takes the listener by the hand and leads him through the music. Not many musicians can do this.

Joost

[quinto34]

Pure speed...hahaha thats funny

[ihstyan]

yes,always extraordinary

[marcoantoniocosta]

I think the fastest this piece should be played is a tempo where you can actually hear that very important triplet figure as a triplet and not a trill, this is too fast for my particular taste.

But this is a very early recording by Argerich. I suppose she wanted to dazzle us with her elite technique. :-)

[urahara53]

@marcoantoniocosta the speeds actually fine, its just that Argerich speeds up the triplet figures anyway which is just an opinion at the end of the day. I play at this speed but still fit the triplets in to hear each note.

[Robotman42]

She plays some sections too quickly for my liking. Some sections are desiring of more waiting.

[Singarl]

I love how she plays it ^^ It interesting to hear different versions of that piece. Backhaus it awesome either. But I think I like her even better ^^

I am playing this right now but it's pretty fast o.o

anyway, thx for uploading! ^^

[quintos34]

EXQUISITE

[luyingwan]

love it!!

[yourforte]

Superb musician.

[uhartchristian]

it as very mature interpretation of a mature musician....

Martha Argerich is at the end of a long career and what she is doing now is well thought and full of knowledge.

Its no more the young less experienced girl who did injoy us with her brilliant technique , she is over that now and shows us pure music. She has no more to prove.....

[mikejr41387]

i agree with you, but this recording is off her debut disk...

[PIanoReview]

While Martha always is a master of playing with a lovely flow in melodic passages, her aggression is just too much for Brahms. It may not be Horowitz in the Brahms 2nd Piano Concerto, but it nonetheless is a pianist who still is missing the warmth and richness in the climactic moments of this work that is at the heart of romanticism. Whether it is the Brahms 3rd Sonata, Ballades, late Brahms or this kind of middle Brahms, there always should be a thick, rich texture when needed.

[1p8t7r]

this is a beautiful peace, but needs a lot of practise, and skill

marta did a fantastic job again. i love her playing. 5 stars! *****

[SuperMusicAngel]

My boyfriend just had a master class at his college and played this. This is an excellent version of a wonderful song.

[AnnMarry19]

@SuperMusicAngel yes I agree, so beautifull piece :) amazing music and Martha

[herma57]

she has/places vision in the piece, sees where it goes, and has a neurotic under-current for Brahms, as a man searching for something he never gets;so he writes music, nothing else to do;

[chacoteris]

Argerich, always extraordinary!

[beramod5185]

omg i want to play this piece sooo bad

but the tempo is ultra fast (well not that fast compared to some other pieces but.. its still fast for me..)

[maternelle01]

And there're faster versions!

[Arvenohx]

Fantastic dynamic range! I'd even go as far as to compare it to horowitz's.

But mabye a little too much spontanaiety for Brahms? Seems a little more suited for Debussey or Ravel.

[herma57]

it's what you do with the music, what vision you impart to it, and Argerich always brings things you never heard before another vision, whereas you can't say that with Hamelin, who plays a kind of center, passive way, pablum like,like he's not even there at times, eveness of tone will not make the music more profound, it's gotta come from some place deep;and again Argerich has this as Richter mostly, and Michelangeli,Pollini

[sopranoprimo]

meravigliosa Martha, grazie

[archcorenth]

I don't like the way she plays the triplets before each octave like they are articulations for the octaves and not individual notes.

I like her usually, particularly her Ravel, but I'm a mediocre pianist, and I think I give this song more feeling than she. Maybe it was just a bad day for her.

[scratch8d]

i love her use of rubato however it may perhaps be a little over the top?

[scratch8d]

use a metronome

[tijo53]

wowwowow cest juste trop bo.....les nuance, les choix de tempo wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Iman2919]

It's extremely well-done... She does very intelligent things with the tempo.

[jumpbuck8]

Si chaque pianiste joue exactement le même, où est la musique? Où est l'excitation?

[gta661610]

Anybody whit two ears knows that Argerich surpasses Michelangeli in every aspect. She has more variety of colors and tones than any other pianist of our times, and that is because her technique. She can attack the keyboard in a lot of diferent ways, her combination of finger technique and use of weight is unique, and of course her sense of music. Technique is not only for speed.

[RabidCh]

Anybody with two ears knows that Argerich is, generally, very different from Michelangeli. She dares to do what Michelangeli doesn't.

However, to scope it down to a similarly played piece you can compare better. If you listen to Ondine Michelangeli plays something very much out of this world. I'm NOT saying that Argerich's, or anyone else's for the matter, isn't worth listening to because they are played differently.

And apparently you haven't really read my posts at all about technique.

[gta661610]

it's impossible to judge different pianist in an objectiv way. I was tryng to say that she owns more possibilities than any other pianist in terms of colors, quality of sound , dynamics, speed without loosing phrasing etc. Even than mosnsters like Horowitz. She got the best tools, then what she does with that, is matter of opinion and taste.If you don't like , it's perfect.I prefer her version of Ondine than Michelangeli's, you don't. There is no conflict at all. Take it easy. Bye.

[cancunhunt]

Pollini, Gavrilov, Michelangeli, Berezovsky, Pogorelich, Hamelin, and Gould all have MUCH better technique than Argerich. Argerich's technique is overrated.

[fionasapple]

WAAAAAAY OFF :D

i can agree with you that hamelin, pollini, michelangeli and argerich are on the same level. but there's really NO WAY that gavrilov is anywhere near that. the guy is actually painful to listen to. and berezovsky can be replaced with a robot and ppl wouldn't even notice. i don't know about pogo and gould tho. i think they're brill smtimes and smtimes they're plain ordinary.

[cancunhunt]

IMHO they are all clearly higher than Argerich, Pollini and Hamelin in particular. Argerich in fast passages, quite frankly, is very painful to my ears (Chopin Op10-4 and Rachmaninoff Piano Concerto 3 especially).

[fionasapple]

seriously? rapidity is like her specialty though. i personally think she's most accurate at high speeds than a whole lot of others.

[cancunhunt]

Martha Argerich is definitely an incredible pianist. Her Kinderszenen in particular is breathtaking. The capriccio from BWV 826 really does 'swing' as she was told by a jazz critic (she does overemphasize the 'swinging' lines at the expense of the other at some points, but what the heck, it's incredible). I think her specialty are music in the tempo of adagio to allegro ma non tropo (i.e. not presto). Her technique in that category of music is unrivaled (oh god, Hamelin can be such a stiff bore)

[cancunhunt]

I often turn away from her rapid music, because it almost seems like she is forcing herself to play that fast to combat anxiety on stage and/or please an audience. Her sincerity in music that requires a singing line, pedal shading, and continuous dynamic gradation is truly valuable.

[freakytea]

A lot of people seem to feel this way about Argerich's fast tempos, but I love her intensity and the feeling of danger that her playing evokes, especially in contrast to her wonderfully sensitive playing in slower sections. Nothing sounds forced at all to me; if anything, she sounds totally driven by the music itself and the emotion she feels while she's playing it. This sincerity and spontaneity are what I look for in musicians, no matter what the genre.

[vint22]

tnk u,kiwi,tnk u for sharing this.

[kjw163]

A rather cool, detached performance. Don't like it.

[uo12345678910]

martha's playing is just perfect! amazing

0:51 is my favorite part :D

[maalga2008]

Gould just different , not better ... ^^

That s my two favorites ...

Martha yu're "my" impossible love ...

[ch88xy]

I am a huge Argerich fan, but must say that I like Glenn Gould's version better.

[kiwibd]

can everyone just stop arguing and enjoy the music?? :) best wishes, kiwi

[shevansilva]

Yes. Sometimes reading comments can be interesting. Yet at times people are so eager to display their egos to the world that they forget what its all about in the first place. "this person has a better technique than that person", "this person is better than that person with this piece". When it gets beyond a certain threshold, its all art and all art is subjective. So....opinions are fine. Just leave egos out of it. And above all, enjoy the music. It is Martha Argerich after all.

[xcellistax]

agreed!

[davidemusica86]

shevansilva I completely agree. I feel like you took the words right out of my mouth. My other favorite thing is when people point out the exact point in the video when someone made a mistake. Good for you that you have such a good ear and picked out a mistake. Who cares.

[beaver7756]

No! :) I love when people argue. These are interesting music discussions. Personnally, it helps me enjoy music even more! We can learn so many things by arguing!

[somedudeplayingpiano]

okey ebglishplayer40, but when everybody thinks his or her way is better, then you will not be exapted by your aproach when you do not accept the aproach from other pianist!!!

[englishplayer40]

I say in all honesty i prefer my own approach to it - otherwise why would any pianist play at all unless they want to produce their own interpretation? , while accepting it is not as brilliant or masterly as hers (..'yet' - a person has to aim for the ideals!) But i am working towards a vision which i believe in, and when i get it technically how i want it, it will be my modest belief as to how the piece should be played.

[englishplayer40]

Thanks thomasmusicwizz for jumping to my defense a little bit! As he says this great site is the place to express strong opinions but it should be done in a substantial way, not merely vindictive words. I guess we can all learn something. I think i was too harsh about Argerich, and i have since changed my mind somewhat. Yes, her playing is technically and musically brilliant, though i still don't think she plays it in a very 'Brahmsian' way.

[aldebussy]

People create so much drama...

Can't they literally shut their mouths and enjoy the gorgeous performance!

[AnnMarry19]

Genialnie, od razu słychać, że gra to Martha:)

[englishplayer40]

perfect is an opinion, according to who? it would be interesting to have this recording played to some of you people before knowing who it was by. Maybe you should listen to 10 different unlabelled interpretations and then rank them in order of preference. it would be veyr interesting. you would have to really only on your ears instead of the power of suggestion of a famous name.

[beryllium2]

I cannot believe you are still at this!!! Give it a rest!!!

[englishplayer40]

ok overmars i think you've brought some sanity to the situation there, and as i already said, i AM giving it a rest now. But lost? lost what? I simply said Argerich is not one of my favourite pianists, but maybe i put it in a bad way and some people who 'worship' her apparently have been offended. A person doesn't have to be in the same league of talent to have an opinion on another, and i never claimed that my performance compares but i don't have to agree what she does with hers.

[ieronim2003]

her performance is great but it seems you don't have the right ears to hear.dynamics perfect tehnically perfect and also the tempo and the tempo changes are perfect

[overmars1603]

Please note that I am not criticising anyone, but hope we'll be open and accept the good things of one's playing and ifnore the bad.. :D

[overmars1603]

Ok guys. Stop this endless quarrels and debates and personal attack! It's endless. Let's be open about each other's interpretation and not criticising one another. I personally like this recording of Brahms Rhapsody in B minor, one of the best recording I heard in Youtube. She has a good sense of phrasing and knows when to pull back her dynamics needed to build up the forte passage effectively, especially in the opening theme, instead of all the bangings of the opening theme from other pianists.

[englishplayer40]

case rested, i'm not replying to anymore of your rubbish. If you want to insult me further and declare to the world my 'mediocrity', then i'm not afraid to leave myself up for scrutiny and i'll let my honest efforts and future video posts do my talking.

[englishplayer40]

so YOU do understand genius? I'm curious.. by your own reasoning this must mean you yourself are NOT mediocre, therefore i and everyone else would love to see the evidence of this instead of hiding behind safe anonimity. No? Then in that case stop being insulting and learn to live with the simple truth not everyone will agree with your tastes in idolization. As for you i'm guessing.. cranky middle aged eccentric talentless woman snob? or male idiot with a more than musical fixation on Argerich?

[francorussie]

Martha Argerich's performance is beauty, while Eng-player40's comments and playing are not. I'm wondering how it can be average or mediocre performers' comments can be that "scathing" as to great, absolutely outstanding musicians. Human nature... besided I'm not sure that those who are really mediocre people really can understand what talent or genius is. (They seem to be happy with what is mediocre and artificial = with themselves).

[englishplayer40]

i'm almost tempted to laugh franco's BS off if it wasn't so stupid. I don't need some idiotic snob with an Argerich fixation to tell me i am 'mediocre' if you want to use that term (i prefer to say 'earnestly professional, moderately talented and dedicated'). It is precisely such people as me who DO understand what talent and genius is, simply because we are higher up the mountain than, say, you, and closer to glimpse the top, and we are engaged in 'doing' and trying instead of just talk.

[beryllium2]

good grief englishplayer... Give it a rest, Still arguing after all this. You've lost, and your a sore loser.

[fionasapple]

maybe you just don't get what others like so much about argerich. afterall, she has to be great in some way to get all this attention inspite of her not being a fan of the media...if only for her incomparable technique and fluidity.

and comparing yourself (an amateur in the eyes of ppl) to her is not at all wise and is quite ridiculous considering your performance wasn't outstanding in any way.

you ARE a good pianist but with all due respect you're far from being compared to legends.

[RabidCh]

Incomparable technique? Sorry, no, not really... It's very good, but not incomparable.

I am not saying she is not a special pianist, but there's sometimes a quality in her playing that makes the music detached or passive, something that one of her teachers, Michelangeli had as well. There's also other qualities that I don't like but they're rather minor in comparison.

[fionasapple]

it was more of a fact that i was stating and not at all an opinion :D

the reasons you provided for her not having flawless technique have very little to do with fluidity & her ability to play anything on the piano. Argerich is in FACT incomparable when it comes to technique.

[RabidCh]

Those weren't really arguments against her technique, I was just stating problems with her general playing.

The two reasons a pianist can be incomparable is because he/she is too different to be compared to or because the technique is of another level. It is the latter I will argue to.

[RabidCh]

Michelangeli is my counterexample - he is the my previous example and a pianist I think that I can easily compare to. Now take their recordings of Gaspard de la nuit. Although Argerich is more dynamically into the piece she doesn't come anything near to the coloring/tone effects of Michelangeli which is of course part of technique. And look, I just compared her!

Another aspect you could argue is speed. Horowitz beats everybody out in pure speed really. (Horowitz/Barbirolli Rach 3 anyone?)

[fionasapple]

i'll have to disagree with the horowitz part. as far as i can remember the very fast recording of the rach3 was his first which imho was completely void of emotion and wasn't at all "horowitzian playing" and i think that's why he took it much slower when he recorded it later. and mind you that with speed comes all those mistakes that V.H. is just famous for. so when it comes to actually playing accurately/fast, i wouldn't put v.h. on the list. he'd maybe top passionate playing or fiery.

[RabidCh]

The Barbirolli Rach 3 was not his first recording (it was with Coates), and it didn't have very many mistakes at all for the utterly insane tempo he was going at. I don't think it was devoid of emotion at all but it did discard lyricism as the fast interpretations do.

I can see where you're coming from with her technique (I used to be a fan), but in the group of the 125++ legendary pianists in the 20th century there are certainly more than a few (or dozen) with incredible technique.

[kiwibd]

That's really ignorant to comment Argerich's recording of Gaspard de la nuit as a playing without coloring/tone effect! maybe that's just owing to the poor sound quality of youtube.

[RabidCh]

I didn't say Argerich didn't play without coloring or tone. I just said that she hardly comes close to the quality that Michelangeli could produce. You're the one being ignorant to what I actually wrote.

P.S. fmt=18 reduces much of the lowered bit rate If you didn't know, CD format classical music is only at a bitrate a little higher than fmt=18. And in any case, YouTube's sound quality can be jacked up even more - If the uploader knows how to.

[jumpbuck8]

Oh come on, is this a race? If you think it is, you are at the wrong place. Go watch Indy 500, that will give you speed. Better still, take one, if you are not already. You are so childish, I am sorry.

[RabidCh]

If you had read my other comments, you would've known that no, I don't think it is a race. I was only comparing a couple different pianists. If you think I'm childish: I think you're jumping to conclusions.

I'm only arguing that Argerich's technique is not so far out that you can't even consider other pianists.

[fionasapple]

i'd say i probably agree with the same thing. although i do prefer her gaspard de la nuit over michelangeli's. i haven't heard his ondine (which is supposedly really good) but as far as scarbo goes, i think Argerich mastered it. i loved the video that was here on youtube. it was just perfect imo.

[cancunhunt]

I completely disagree. If you think Argerich has incomparable technique, you aren't listening carefully. Her tone is nowhere near as even as Hamelin, Pollini, Michelangeli and Gavrilov in scales and arpeggios. Pogorelich (Haydn), Bolet (Liszt/Wagner) and Horowitz (Scarlatti) have more color.

[ThomasMusicWizz]

As englishplayer40 has already said, if you insist on not being able to have our own opinions on different musicians interpretations on certain pieces simply because we are not at the same professional level at which they are, then why do you hide beneath the comfortable defense of anonymity ? If you are going to persistently critisize englishplayer for his "mediocre" playing, then I challenge you to produce a video in which you are performing the very same piece .

[englishplayer40]

i would say outstanding interpretation means means playing in an inspired, expressive way while at the same time being faithful to the composer's intention. For that we only have the score and a general knowledge of what Brahm's music is like, and some knowledge of the styles and conventions of the time help too.

[francorussie]

Martha Algerich's is stunning beautiful and deep, (but it is also stunning when you compare it to the strikingly mediocre "Englishplayer40" version)

I'm not criticizing E...player40 technically, but he's making himself ridiculous.

Look, E...player40, you say you're 40 and you are English, I have English friends & I am sorry that you do not feel shy to present youself as an "English player". I see may be you want attract the attention of potential clients to your playing-at-weddings business

[englishplayer40]

let me say again, i don't have a 'playing at weddings' business. i just happened to play for a friend's wedding once. i don't give a transcendental one way or another about doing anymore of that kind of thing, although i'm happy to if asked.

[englishplayer40]

1.Barenboim 2.Askenazy 3.Gilels 4.Van Cliburn 5.Lill 6.Bolet 7.Brendel 8.D'ascoli 9.Richter 10.Pollini 11.Kissin 12.Zimmerman 15..20..30..

40..

50.Argerich

Now i'm teasing lol. though seriously i'm feeling generous there.

[francorussie]

Absolutely beautiful and deep by Martha Argerich. Bravo. I can be overcritical with regards to such great pianists (for instance, I did not agree with her jeux d'eaux, but it is still beautiful), but she is great.

By the way, Englishplayer40 likes to make disparaging comments, while I listened to some of his interpretation, well... apparently he can only dream of achieving a level close to Argerich's. ha-ha

[englishplayer40]

I don't 'like to make disparaging remarks', but what i do like to do is listen critically to various interpetations of things and form an honest informed opinion. Plenty of pianists i do praise. i know i'm not in her league, (and i don't need some amateur? professional - small?, middling? player? listener? hack? to tell me that) but if i could choose which world class player i could play like, she would not be it. There's at least 50 i rate higher.

[aldebussy]

Then, go away and enjoy the 50 first on your list on other forums.

You basically defiled 5 pages with your ridiculous arguments...

That's to all of you. How can you be so incredibly bored?????

Haven't you got anything to do in your lives?!

[englishplayer40]

rubbish. her playing always so scatty. fast does not make for outstanding interpetation. how she made a reputation i'll never know. there is always something superficial about her touch

[beryllium2]

are you insane? Scatty? If you call this interpretation fast you are sadly mistaken. Martha Agerich is a godess of the piano.

[francorussie]

Beryllium2, I listened to the Englishplayer40 (how pretentious) playing of the Rhapsody a few days ago, it is so boring and medicore, my cousin and another girl among classmates, who are just good amateurs, when they were about 18, played the piano better than him! Actually from the (now erased?) comments on his page, he tries to make "business" by playing at weddings and so on. I would NOT have invited him to my wedding!!!

[francorussie]

erratum: "mediocre"...

[englishplayer40]

then show us, asshole. pretentious is an adjective that applies to YOU until you put up a video of your own (or said classmates) to back up such idiot unfounded statements. Incidently i didn't insult any of you people (are you related to Argerich?? if not, then why the neurotic defence of her?), i merely expressed a criticism of her style of playing. A person doesn't have to be in the same 'weight category' to express considered opinions on favourite or non-favourite pianists. grow up, people.

[ThomasMusicWizz]

Shut up .

he has his own opinion ,

he simply wishes to share his own thoughts among us on Youtube.

Isn't that the purpose of this great website?

And since when has it been required that one must be of the same musical calibre as another to have the ability to voice their opinion on their playing ?

And the continuous critisism of his playing for lack of an argument is simply immature .

[VikingBerserker]

Lol. I love it when people on YouTube talk like this.

"shut up. everyone has a right to an opinion, except YOU because your opinion is different than mine so it is wrong." I didn't even read what the other person wrote because I was too distracted by the hypocrisy of your statement.

[ThomasMusicWizz]

Please enlighten me on how my statement is hypocritical . I didn't say francorussie's opinion was wrong, I merely am saying that they should not attack Englishplayer personally rather than discussing his comment.

[VikingBerserker]

Telling someone to shut up, which denies someone the chance to give their opinion, and then immediately after defending someone else's right to have an opinion seems hypocritical, at least in my books.

Obviously I jumped in the middle of some big argument, but I still think that posts like yours are still pretty funny (especially when read out of context as I seem to have done).

[ThomasMusicWizz]

Isn't it quite obviously that francorussie expressed their opinion multiple times regarding something irrelevant to what englishplayer40 said ? Have you read the argument yet ?

[VikingBerserker]

Yeah just did. That's a pretty intense argument they were having.

Definitely should have read that before I replied to your post, but of course, out of context, it seemed very funny.

[ThomasMusicWizz]

Haha, understandable. :)

So at this point in time, where do you stand VikingBerserker?

[aldebussy]

Can you shut up? Then, why are you listening to her if she's so bad? Argerich is one of the FEW people who has kept the French pianistic techniques. Her touch is so soft that it sounds like chocolate.

Define outstanding interpretation.

[francorussie]

Englishplayer40 might give the impression of being sensitive to music when he TALKS, but he plays, apparently he has far less sensibility than Martha Argerich... Oh so far...

[englishplayer40]

we should quit before it gets personal. if you have anything else to say put up vid and stop hiding behind anonimity. so i don't like martha argerich's style - is that a personal attack on you franco?? i never claimed to be better than her or anywhere near her equal, simply that she is not one of my favourite top pianists, sorry.

[beryllium2]

best interpretation ever.

[francorussie]

Amazing, and emotionally absolutely beautiful. Bravo. I feel just happy hearing this.

[catianalini]

i'm playing that now.. or tryong to.. hehe

lov this version

[francorussie]

yes well some already play this: I think I heard Englishplayer40's, and I honestly did not like it, he-he ;-) but Englishp40 feels "courageous" enough to say a bad word about such a beautifully gifted pianist like Argerich (by the way, Englishplayer 40 is a supporter of a rather failed, though highly qualified pianist who hates Argerich, Richter, Horowitz and says he admired none of his colleagues at all; he-he, do you see the ambition?). By the way Argerich's is poetic and touching, too

[englishplayer40]

i am confused, who am i supporter of? personally there are many i do admire. your comments are interesting though franco. there's nothing like a good debate, and Arerich's playing is very 'debatable' haha. i guess that in itself means there is something unique and poetic about it, that i don't deny. but in many places her approach is simply 'not appropriate' to put it politely.

[paulostroff99]

Awesome! She is up there with the best of this past century,and towers above most others. TY