RICHTER - Chopin etude no.1 op.10

[Theonedue]

He loses tempo in this piece (gets faster, especially near the end) and gets a little sloppy. Pollini, Ohleson, and Argerich own this etude.

[bertrandui]

57s 1mn Russian mountains !! Amazingggg

[basilcellocello]

this is god!

[g7727]

ready set go

[BBQhonk]

Wow, this is pretty bad from a technical perspective. Listen to Argerich play this piece at the '65 Chopin competition and see the difference.

[geertdehoux]

Ja, inderdaad, zolang muziek je interesseert...

Wedergroetjes,

Geert.

PS. Is wel een 'serieus' tempo, om dit 'live' te doen!

[EmdrGreg]

He was playing this before a life audience after all. It takes courage, nerves of steel and a tough ego to play this in so vulnerable a way. It wasn't flawless, but it was consistent and coherent. I bet most in the audience found it electrifying. We also forget that pianists of Richter's era and before did not have the benefit of countless recorded performances when they were young. They had only their own talent and wits, and those of their teachers and fellow musicians.

[geertdehoux]

In my humble opinion, this is not a good performance, nor pianistically, nor musically.

[shenkeey]

@geertdehoux why?

[geertdehoux]

@shenkeey

Quite durty and musically without imagination.

All the bass notes are brutally played.

[shenkeey]

@geertdehoux On the contrary; he made it his own (read top comment) and in my opinion the bass notes should be played brutally

[geertdehoux]

@shenkeey

OK, I respect your opinion, but I don't agree.

Greetings,

Geert.

[shenkeey]

@geertdehoux That's the great thing about music, everyone interprets it differently :)

Groeten,

Maran (je bent Belgisch ^^)

[geertdehoux]

I heard Arcadi play this Etude several times in any tonality I wanted!

His speed and perfection were just F A N T A S T I C !!

Geert Dehoux, pianist.

[Galbusoculus]

There is something dirty in his harmony, the wrong pedal,may be?

[tenorMANRICO]

now this is how Richter rolls

[boom9999]

Wonderful version of this etude. When was it recorded and is this recording available on CD?

[colourfulwithaU]

Of course, Richter is the best. Who is surprised?

[Ellinidara]

@colourfulwithaU Many pianists are amazing.There is not a great pianist better than another:each has its own characteristics wich makes an artist unique.Great,is Martha,Horowitz,Askenazy,Rubin­stein,Michelangeli and many others,beginning with those unjustly least preferred,like the incredible Eileen Joyce,for example.So,Yes,your comment surprises me.

[geertdehoux]

@Ellinidara

Volodos is probably the very best pianist in piano history.

[Ellinidara]

@colourfulwithaU Many pianists are the best.I prefer others interpreters much more than Richter.

[Renard8214]

Несмотря на всякие мелкие технические погрешности, это исполнение для меня было, есть и будет лучшим. Это ЖИВОЕ исполнение. Это Радость, это Восторг! Вот что я люблю.

[scarbolaught]

mauvaise pédale... pas de propreté ... il y a pire...

[susanmyra]

Feels sluggish after hearing cziffra!

[shusarik]

This is not actually his best performance. There is an old recording from the fifties or early sixties of him playing this as an encore where he plays the left-hand octaves staccato (at .07) and again in the repeat of that passage. It's absolutely wonderful! No one else does that--It must have been an improvisatory impulse on his part .

[fredericfranc]

Sorry to talk like this, about the legendary artist, but this soounds amazingly inaccurate to me, and the tone is all wrong for Chopin. You want the idea of exactly the right tone, always go to Rubinstein or Ashkenazy.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc Dont be sorry to talk about anything unless you truly are regretting it. Richter starts of with about Agerich tempo in this piece. Then suddenly this bastard just gets faster and faster. There is no recording of this piece beside it comparable. The way Richter does things. It's fearless. The approach is always solid and sublime. Many pianists are also precausious of using their fingers forcefully. Richter gives it his all everytime, fearless and honest to the music. Amazing life.

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 Your description is pretty accurate up to a point, he is "fearless" and perhaps reckless, and nice of him to let go like this, but one can ask "is this fair to the composer", the one composer central to the piano. Chopin is a dictator, and must be obeyed, so I was taught. Richter blows a lot of notes, his tone is harsh, conveys none of the Chopinesque "effortless singing legato" that this composer "owns". Argerich is much closer to this "effortlessness" w

.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc That's for me what makes many of Richters performances extraordinary. I like the character he gives Chopin's music. It's also a clear definition of both persons character. One seeks the beauty in the music by longing and making it very aesthetic. The other one doesn't long for it. He travels right into it. wants to give an as realistic interpretation of the piece as possible.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc I don't know if i'm talking over myself here. I think Chopin shows what he had made beautiful in his head. Whereas Richter shows what he is experiencing. Maybe a bit like their life stories. One longed for his country and the other refused to leave his country behind. I'm not saying playing the piece like a waterfall is wrong. Just that Richters style and passion is really good. It is very ideal as a pianist in many cases to have the skills and determination that Richter has.great

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc I'm sorry to Bomb you with these big replies. It is because the first post you made only shows that you have got a really good understanding of these pieces. That kindda got my interest. You are absolutely right Richters version doesn't sound like a waterfall most of the way. It's like Chopins notes are like a waterfall in it's original form. In Richters interpretation it's a person's feelings and emotions standing by a waterfall. the feelings could be sad, happyness, etc. etc..

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 Don't worry about Bombing me...I am bombed already...

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc They can bomb with constructive critizism. But if people can't see you know stuff by the comment you wrote.. That says a lot more about them:D. You at least must have tried to attempt Chopin pieces to say what you have wrote in your replies. Most discussions aren't about right and wrong. It is often two sides of a story, and even more often two truths. Not often black and white that is interesting. It's all these gray stuff and empty spaces between.Respect, you critizise Richter:D

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 Richter was one of the greatest interpreters...because he was so serious and he took risks. With Chopin, his "outcomes" are often strange, but always interesting...

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc You never see Richter mention anything about his work that is risky. If you try and think about the two examples i made, does it then sound strange to you? I also am profound of his interpretations , but i never find them strange. Like when i take the west influenced pianists and the east influenced pianist and comepare them to each other. Or with the different schools or techniques. The results are often strange and weird. But Richters play seems very forward.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc He's like forcing every note, every finger to be more conscious. Even in that crazy speed he's doing things in, he still tries to give it a bit more every single time a finger strikes a key. I think he's a lot more "precise" to the music than most pianists who try to follow the partiture. He had to be. Considering he played ballet music for many years. It's also clear when one notices that he is never truly dissatisfied when playing accompanying to something else.

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 Note that the way you describe his approach, it is basically "risky" because you depart from the "text". But this is the good thing about the people from the Russian School, some of them... for me the idea of taking risks like that, if you have that kind of an attitude, it is a good thing to try, and most pianists in the Wast would not try it like that, they would not know how to do it. Richter knew how to "take risks" from his long and unusual experience outside of the concert hall..

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc It is not more risky than it is "true and right"(not in any kind of worshipping way:D). It's actually some of the very basics of piano playing. Just that these basics are used at a very high lvl of skill. basically it's what we all learned from the start. Read notes. Try understanding them as they are presented(Richter). If we didn't get it in that way. There is reconnaissance then(most others pianists). Ofc he's not constantly on that lvl, but it is his style.

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 I have heard this guy even LIVE(!), and read all sorts of bio materials, including his "writings". You make him out to be some kind of a very systematic, "scientific" pianist. I don't see him like this, and his teacher, Neuhaus, would not have taught him to think like this. Richter's "thinking" is often quite crazy artistically, and he would admitto this. His interpretations may be bizarre too, and he would admit to this. His "risk taking", very premeditated, will sometimes fail him.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc When Richter was studying under Neuhaus. Every1 thought Gilels was the best of his students. But Neuhaus said Richter was his ideal student. I'm not saying he's overthinking things like Glenn Gould, etc. does. Through his life i think he always did what others only thought of. If you follow my last reply, i specifically said he does the first take, but not really the reconnaissance part.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc The type of pianist like Richter does a take, minus the reconnaissance part, then takes the part again until he can do it. Ofc he does study the pages, but it is always one way to make progress. This will make the piece very current and dynamic. One page at a time! Never going to the next page unless you truly master the page. So the Reconnaissance never goes in. Obviously Richter didn't think it out like i'm describing it. I'm just trying to describehis work process with words.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc The "scientific" part you mention is ofc my words describing his workstyle. But the things i explaine out is taken out of his own words. I recall that in most things i've seen/heard of Richter or read about him he often(if not always) repeat many of his studies, theories and beliefs. I personally think his best words are: " One page at a time. Never move on to the next page unless you completely master the page" and "I don't understand it, I don't like it".

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc These are words clearly associated with his character and way of playing the piano. I'm hiding the most of my time and really don't play anymore for any1. But Richter fascinates me and i truly envy his talent. It seems so crazy how one can force oneself on matters that are finished. But I don't think it's "forcing" for Richter, it's just natural. It's natural that everytime he sits down and faces the pages it's just "another take" again. He even remembers most previous takes.

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 You quote Richter like you heard his "inside voice"(?). It does appear that he worked the way you describe. When I speak of his "risk taking", I speak of the actual "outcomes" of his "process". This is always uncertain, and Richter obviously was aware of this, and he was used the the uncertainty, and it did not bother him, particularly. Most artists do not even get to that point because they are not anywhere near as serious or methodical.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc The quotes are from interviews and stuff. So, NO! No hokus pokus here:D. You practically described what i did before. The part we are in difference is the "risk" part. I can see why you think it is a risk. I just think that in Richters hands the risk is very small, maybe even non existence in the truth. The thing about Richter is, that he was like this since childhood. Neuhaus said he didn't really teach Richter. He was naturally gifted a perfect student.

[fredericfranc]

@Ianthe22 You take Richter to be a "simple proposition wthout contradictions", I take him to have a lot of contradictions, which is OK in a major artist. On the basis of what he says Richter admitted that his "process" could lead to interpretive failure. I don't want you to take this in the wrong way, but on the basis of my listening, a "reasonable percentage" of his interpretations are quite bad. This I take to come out of his "risk taking" but of course there are other ways to see this.

[Ianthe22]

@fredericfranc Ofc there are contradictions. Not many since he just repeats the same thing often, but ofc there are some. I'm not trying to pedestal him to some "godly" being. It's just as a pianist he pretty much does what i think most people believe makes a good pianist. Bad? I would say not always satisfactory to his own top standards, but never "bad". It is also the one of Richters main traits. His very hig bottom line in his playing. This is due to his discipline and standards as a pianist.

[abmsghost1]

@fredericfranc "effortless singing legato" as you write is almost impossible when playing at this speed.Other factors of pianoplaying do have priority here.Anyway imho.But who are we to discuss and analyze the playing of a giant like Richter?What is taht we try to achieve by doing this?imho nothing els but making a fool of ourselves.

[fredericfranc]

@abmsghost1 ...there are pianists who achieve the "effortless singing legato" much better than Richter...the purpose of discussing the "limitations" (if indeed any) in the technique, sound, etc. of major performers like Richter is that it makes us go back and listen to what we get from him even more closely...that is, after all, what the YT makes possible, the 'listening and comparing...

[navarrovals]

onestamente mi ha deluso parecchio..troppo ma troppo pedale, e anche un po' di errorini..

[leonboelmann]

...ogno volta e' capace di commuovere..

GRANDE.........

Preferisco il vinile al digitale.

[NNomad]

I've heard countless interpretations of this peice and this certainly made me sit up an take notice. This piece is so notoriously difficult to take it beyond a harmonic progression of arpeggios and give it true musicality. The pianist in this recording has managed, imho, to create a shimmering harp-like texture that it stands quite rightly as a fully-formed piece of music. I, for one, am impressed.

[ikemaster9]

Hell yeah, it's Richter.

[MrYou2ber]

@ikemaster9 can I make this my comment, too?

[refuseit]

@NNomad "The pianist in this recording" is only the greatest pianist of the 20th century.

[Theonedue]

What about Rachmaninoff or Josef Hoffman??

[geertdehoux]

@refuseit

Come on!

[grrruaaa]

best ever played. he has the right technique

[pianistpedro]

I prefer the Ashkenazy's version...This is fantastic but there is too much Sustain...

[Liebromeistal]

A lot of wrong notes and smudged passages...

[bratupir]

It's instructive a comparative look on second sonata by Schumann. Argerich made an oustanding virtuoso execution. Nevertheless when it comes to final cadenza though briliantly played, you can "hear the fingers" of Argerich where on Richter you hear the MUSIC. That's why they are in different categories. I think Argerich is a extraordinary pianist but with no link to the tradition of great musicians like Neuhaus, Prokofiev, Rachmaninof and so on.

[ElEsquisProductions]

@Liebromeistal Music is made by humans and therefore it is not perfect... music It is not about wrong notes, but rather the message that it delivers to the souls. Think of that before commenting.

[Jirzy]

This is a recording from Prague?

[daniel15671]

I think that it's significant that Mr. Richter is giving a live performance, whereas Mr. Bachaus is recording in a studio. The pressure of live performance is often likely to result in more brilliant playing at the cost of architectural concerns.

[JonRob2109]

It's very easy to over compicate this piece as previous posts have managed to. Equally easy to over simplify it and regard it as "Only an Etude"

I like Richter's version with loads of pedal, it's as i played it. I well prefer it to Cziffra's version, but that's just me.

[HeleneLens]

Dear JonRob2109, I agree with your comment. I too prefer Richter's interpretation of this Etude although I am a fan of Cziffra too.

[ilovescarlatti]

Dear Indigoblue555 i totally agree with your comment. The rendition of many pianists in music pieces are to be considered at the maximum level. how can we say which is the best?? hi

[givemetime123]

Encore une autre belle version...

[saiserieht]

Best recording of that piece EVER! Even better than Backhaus.

[deltasquared7777]

cant agree--although it may be presumptious to compare these two absolute masters of the piano--the real beauty of this etude is how it centers on a brilliant and delicate shimmering treble line as subtly and very carefully grounded by the bass... Backhaus interprets this delicate balance most beautifully, so that the treble really shimmers, whereas Richter's bass tends to be overly dominant ...

[saiserieht]

Well, I think we can both agree, that both Richter's and Backhaus' readings are brilliant.

What I like so much about this very version is the dynamics: Richter 'explodes' when he ascents, that results in kind of a dialogue between bass line and treble line. It goes back and forth: [bass] 2 3 4 [top note] 2 3 4 [bass] 2 3 4 [top note] 2 3 4 etc. Its a rather simple effect, really, but I like it, its how I feel this piece works best, but that is just my opinion.

[saiserieht]

where [bass] and [top note] each are accentuated, that is.

[saiserieht]

Hm, I'll have to further clearify what I mean. In Richter's version, [bass] and [top note] are accentuated and 2 3 4 are not. Backhaus will place an accent on 1 2 3 4, so its just less dynamic, but it is also as Chopin wrote it, so Backhaus' version is more true to the score ;-)

[deltasquared7777]

perhaps my tendency towards synesthesia gets in the way, but I hear this etude as centered on creation of a shimmery, almost visually perceptible treble surface, with the bass serving solely to provide a perspective that prevents this surface from becoming a stagnant flatness. The dynamics which you admire in Richter's "explosive" ascents, for me break through and somewhat destroy the pristine beauty of this surface and do not quite work in his interpretation of this particular Chopin etude..

[saiserieht]

Let's conclude that Richter adds drama at the cost of structure. What breaks the surface or the line for me are those accents on all 4 beats. I too feel that there should be a kind of homogeneity.

[indigoblue555]

to saiserieht - I rate your review of this piece as abs. interesting -but I expect a committed enthusiast as you are,putting it in a different way: no soloist can be rated as the best ever whatever the score is.

Personal taste often turns into absolute statement ! I'm sure that you would enjoy

so many other renditions of this piece.

Each one with its own colours and phrasing: Samson Francois,Berezowsky,

Gavrilov.Pachmann...each master showing a different relation with the score.

[iguarni]

wordless!!!!!!

[hansmeyer111]

Incredible. This is art. His music is speaking....

[rabengeraun]

I love his Chopin; odd that he's not primarily thought of as a Chopin-player

[Sinfoniette]

Although his Chopin is fantastic, he was also greater in other things, thats why.

[KeithWhalen11]

One of the best piano players and communicators of music of all-time in fact.

[slickric25]

Masterfull, powerfull, passionate and nothing short of amazing, just a few adjetives that come to mind.