Added: 4 years ago
From: stephenykevin
Views: 81,646
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (128)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • always gotta love the last major chord in a minor piece :)

  • @gohanisbuckethead Its called a tierce de picarde :)

  • the way he's miming i'm sure he had a different brain waves to most of us,something like a savant? he must be visualising the music in his head like a photographic memory

  • this is one of my favorite fugues, i have only 2 versions by gould, this is new to me, faster and more staccato, just pure genius. this should settle the matter of him splicing records. he could play this stuff, notice at 1 minute he plays piano, then the inversions start, amazing. its like 4 people talking to each other, man it is fast and powerful, this is such a great fugue like Bach was showing off. the ending is genius of Bach and Gould.

  • @trevjr he did splice sometimes on recordings, that's known, not to fix mistakes, but to use best takes. Common practise in the recording industry.

  • thats absolut

  • organman52

    You despise Glenn Gould, you say( I think he would be deeply

    sad if he could listen this statement). You say DESPISE, but I doubt - more probably, your feelings are anger and envy.

  • The way the voices kick into this fugue is awesome. It's kinda like a kings of leon tune, bring in the different instruments one by one until the climax.

  • es hermoso y sublime ,gracias por este posting.

  • amazing. did anyone notice that the music stand is the other way round?

  • Even after the piece is over, he continues to sway his torso. And I just love his right leg - all the way out in right field. What a role model !

  • @organman52 What, does it offend your sense of aesthetics? Gould only cares about music; he can make damn well whatever pose he likes!

  • @Terrdemarzielle Oh yes he can - or could. And in so doing, I despise him completely.

  • If you cannot understand these fugues, you fail to understand you very existence.

  • I forgot how awesome this was.

  • gooooooould!

  • Just visualize Glenn Gould as Joe Cocker or Mick Jagger prancing around, gesticulating or gyrating (or both), bringing forth their artistry. Do that, and the Gould you see here is tame and seriously reserved, well behaved and almost anachronistically gentlemanly.

  • The reason people tend to chose say of Rach or Liszt over someone like JS Bach is because the glories of the music are not obvious - as they are in Liszt's wild rush, and Rach's soaring grand%Proxy-Connection: keep-alive

    Cache-Control: max-age=0

    lines, with Bach - You gotta pull it out, something Gould has

  • This sound is the voice of God,and his legenadary hands,his instrument.Glenn forever:*

  • i don't care, if gould played it too fast, it's just marvellous.

  • This is Genius

  • @LowMan94 A legendary pianist for sure!!!!

  • @organman52 I hope you mean "sick" like the way teens use it, because then I totally agree. Gould was hella sick with Bach on the piano. As sick as Malmsteen busting out speed metal riffs on an axe in the 80's. Correction, more sick than that, since Bach's music is exponentially more complex and intellectually rigorous, yet Gould doesn't falter with a single finger the whole time.

  • If Gould is as you describe, then so are the majority of musical performers. Everyone has an ego. Some just hide it better than others. I think the appropriate word for Gould is "honest". In the interest of discourse however, I would be interested to know how you think he is destroying this music, given that there are no tempo or articulation markings on the original score. I see Gould as someone who explored the original score with remarkable devotion, and evolved his interpretations over time.

  • Sorry, we didn't realize that you are the only one who understands how Bach _really_ wanted the fugue played. Seriously, what was he like in person?

    Also, if you read the comments, you'll notice that no one agrees with you.

    Cheers.

  • I think Bach wanted to give the player freedom to play in their own way, whilst expecting them to use common sense (i.e what makes musical sense.)

    In the case of Gould, I believe he wanted to encourage players to be more free and break from the trends that exist in playing classical music. Of course he would have been able to play in a conventional way, but that simply isn't his way.

  • Comment removed

  • @Terrdemarzielle @Terrdemarzielle Keep spewing your propaganda. And by all means, keep worshiping this psycopath. It suits your style.

  • @organman52 I don't worship him. Do you know what 'propaganda' is?

  • @Terrdemarzielle : Yes. A suitable husband of a goose !

  • @organman52 Thank you! This has to be the first substantive, salient, and intelligent comment I have heard in a while. I have never understood why so many performers feel that they can do whatever they damn well please with such great music (under the justification of "interpretation") and furthermore, and this is even more baffling, why so many people fawn over and idolize such performers. If one did even a modicum of research one would know how this music should go.

  • @jnak8388 I am glad you agree. And I agree with every word you have written here.

  • Absolutely fantastic!

  • I love this video. It's simply incredible!

  • perfect!

  • I don't know anything about tempi or articulations.How about love for music!

  • Smartest comment i've read in a while ;)

  • @beatadolub You should.  You might be interested in hearing it at a much, much slower tempo, for instance. It sounds amazing.

  • Comment removed

  • What "tempi and articulations" did Bach write? Don't assume that what you see in your edition was written by Bach.

  • As well, they tempi and articulations meant different things in Bach's time.

  • Bach didn't really write articulation (or tempo?) anyway.

  • bach almost never wrote any markings on his music. the only exception is the italian concerto and the prelude in cminor from book1 of the well tempered clavier and a few others.

  • i like his style... :)_

  • Dead leaves winter sunlight and smoke

    Warming his hands on a trash fire

    Singing to himself, here's a bloke

    Who in Cohen's words was a bird on wire.

  • This is very good, and probably much better than any of you can do; being players of turntables and cds; but I suggest you try out Charles Rosen's renditions of these works, from 1970 or so

  • calm down

  • Look in the mirror kingkong!

  • Right, so him looking like a "chimp" affects his playing? So if you were to listen to him playing on a CD or something, then what would you say? Because this is a video of him playing, you're not paying attention to the music, you're paying attention to nothing even related to the music, you're paying attention to his face, which is pretty stupid.

  • Not being able to process the audio and video at the same time has NOTHING to do what I was saying. I was saying comment on his fucking music, that's the point of the video, not his looks. The video's just there as a bonus. That's why I used the CD example, because if you had a CD or this on your iPod or whatever of him playing this, then what would you say? You don't even say HOW he's "unmusical" because there isn't much you can say because you can't back yourself up, stupid idiot.

  • Feel sorry for this u2bmetub, he's only crying out for attention. Poor soul, I bet he has no parent.s

  • @u2bmetub If you seriously think he always plays the same, your are horribly mistaken. You have obviously not listened to the breadth of his recorded work. One only needs listen to the 51, 55, and 81 recordings of the Goldberg Variations to see how much his playing of the works evolved. Indeed one of his quoted reasons for quitting concert performances was that he felt stifled by audience expectations for a work to sound a certain way. You obviously have no clue, and are a troll baiting people.

  • @u2bmetub Also, gesticulations do not make a pianist a vainglorious matron. Every performer has bodily gesticulations. It is something that is developed over time subconsciously by spending 8 hours a day at the keyboard. If a flippantly lifted hand makes one a vainglorious matron, I have similarly off-target adjectives for nearly every pianist I've seen live or recorded on video.

  • Furthermore, fugal writing employs contrasting elements and contrapuntal strucures that demand a proper and unique tonal presentation according to harmonic implications and emotional context. Listen to other people playing Bach and you'll eventually hear how much Gould sucks at interpretation, if any.

  • And last but certainly not least have you ever heard a great pianist—most of which never become famous—interpret a piece by actualyy using INFLEXIONS, the secret to playing musically? Aparently not.

  • Errata: "actually"

  • He plays Bach like a machine, when there are so many wonderful things that can be done to bring the music to life, such as creating a musically interpretative line by using a wider dynamic pallete, using phrasing, employing crescendos and decrescendos and most importantly playing with a singing, expressive, flexible and speaking tone. The notes need not all be the same in color and volume. Any computer can do that. Gould plays the piano like a brass player plays a hymn.

  • How can he use crescendos and decrescendos when bach wrote most of his keyboard music for the harpsichord.

  • But he is not playing a harpsichord, is he? Are you saying Bach meant for his music to be played in an unmusical way? You must be joking. Do not put limitations on Bach just because the instruments available during most of his life were limited. Furthermore, literart narratives do not have any dynamic or interpretative markings, yet when we read out loud we intonate, don't we? Music is no different, and it was customary to do so in Bach's time.

  • Errata: "literary"

  • I hope you don't expect Bach's instrumental music to be played like a harpsichord would. The dynamic elements in musical interpretation arise out of the harmonic context intrinsic in a score and out of the melodic material. They are indelibly intertwined with a genuine artistic rendering of the piece.

  • Choppy and brash, monotonous, devoid of musicality, feeling, tone or any semblance of interpretation, machine-like and overall a great deservice to Bach. Typical Glenn Gould at his worst. Oh, and to the groupies, I already know you will thumb down en masse, so go F*** yourselves, you are tone deaf anyway, so who cares about your idiotic opinions. Take his cretinous staccato butchering of the piano and any music he dirties and shove it up your empty skull until it blows.

  • Censorship even by abuse of the rating system is undemocratic and vile so go suck my dick you pitiful bastards. Glenn Gould is an will always remain an idiot, an amusical keybed fascist-communist copulating his crusty goose-stepping and narrow-minded and crass and meaningless finger diarrhea ejaculate right into your orgasming brains.

  • Lets see you do better

  • Even the lowliest among my students can interpret better and play more musically than this staccato monkey on broken wheels. You are deaf and blind and stupid and terribly amusical, along with all the other disturbed Glenn Gould Bulldozer- Sledgehammer "technique" fans.

  • So you are saying you are better glenn gould. Funnily enough, I've never heard of you before. Maybe its because you are too much of a pillock to play the piano.

  • You are an idiot. Being famous has nothing to do with skill level or musicianship in particular. He got famous because of his eccentricity and weirdness. It masqueraded as genius for the gullible to suck on. Glenn Gould was actually a mediocre pianist in all areas that really matter to professional music making but one i.e., evenness and speed. He sucked horribly in all other aspects of musicianship of which existence you are clearly unaware of.

  • So you are saying that anyone who is weird and eccentric would be as famous as Gould. I really don't get why you loathe him so much. I'm not a fan of Gould but is he really that bad from your view? Sure he did some strange things with the music he played but so did Horowitz. If Gould didn't have the technique to achieve evenness and speed do really think that he could make it into Royal Conservatory of Music in Toronto and win 4 grammy awards?

  • Look man, you keep putting words into my mouth. I never said many of the things you impute, at least not the way you present them. Any good student in any undergraduate school can play evenly, just like he does. But there is more to playing, which Gould rarely does, and most other players do plenty, though they don't become famous, since they lack the personality to become commercialized.

  • Problem with Gould is that all he ever does is pound the keys with the same annoying, amusical, rude and distasteful staccato articulation which like I said the first time, is offensive to the Music of Bach. That is why I hate his playing.

  • I shall not enumerate them for the uneducated folk such as yourself. Go study. FYI, there have been hundreds of pianists worldwide at any one time who could play better then he ever did, especially on this easy piece. Even a child of 10 with proper training can outplay this loser who bullies his way through notes like a hippo on a rampage as if interpretation, tone and musical beauty and emotion mean shit to him.

  • NO bonehead, I am saying most everybody in the professional musical world is better than this trained monkey. This is not about me, since I do not bang the piano like this fool does. It seems that he can only play with one kind of articulation: can you guess which one, if you are smart? There is no phrasing, no legato to speak of, and no emotions as he plows his way like the mechanical industrial bureaucrat he is. Fuck off!

  • You are writing your comments like factual reports. The upshot is that he had the technique to enter a prestigious school, he won 4 grammys and he is regarded by most musicians with the exception of you, one of the greatest pianists in history. "Why watch videos which upset you?"

  • Numerous people enter prestigious schools, crappy pop and country people can get Grammy awards which effectively makes these meaningless, so what is your point? Actually most musicians I know think the same way I do, which is we all hear how Gould is playing with a unilateral staccato and detached articulation, for no musical purpose. Which musicians do you know? Aparently bad ones. People thing he is great because they are sheep, and they adulate famous personalities. Upset? No, just bashing it

  • "You are writing your comments like factual reports."

    It's called analysis my boy. The prerequisite to learning, scholarly debate and judicious reasoning. Keep learning.

  • Well you certainly wouldn't be able to be a politician unless you're hitler. You think that you are right, everyone else is wrong and nothing will cause you to change your mind. I presume this is how you write all your comments judging from the comments on your profile. Wouldn't it be easier if you just kept your mouth shut from spreading hate.

  • You are an idiot, like I said before. What the fuck does Hitler and politics have to do with this discussion, to which you are unable to bring any specifics, like the imbecile you are? You even complained about factual analysis pertaining to these considerations here, which clearly denote you are a cretin.

  • So you get the fuck out of my face and shut your piehole, unless you can make some meaningful comments. You have mentioned nothing factual or pertinent so go to Hell. You keep your mouth shut, since your comment to keep mine shut makes you just as fascist as the hitlerist style you falsely complain about.

  • So get used to my comments asshole, they are here to stay. Unless you bring specifics, you will always look like the idiot you are. And no intelligent listener can deny my words. Fuck you. You were unable to rebut any of my facts.

  • LOL YOUR facts? What facts have you come up with? All YOU said was that he sucks. YOU couldn't feel any emotion from Gould's playing because you're tone deaf. You hid behind your screaming stupidity by replacing points as swearing.

  • And stop fucking putting words into my mouth you little scoundrel. I never said "everyone else" is wrong you shitface, I said everyone who likes Gould's playing you moron. That is not everyone, but a minority. Eat shit.

  • Ever heard of an exaggeration? Has anyone on this video shared your point of view on Gould? No. You think you're on top of the world but you're simply not. People who are like you are scum. But you, you're the fungus beneath the scum.

  • @u2bmetub Only the Devil himself can feel such offense and speak such filth upon hearing the voice of God and his wise judgement on you, an eternal sinner.

  • @u2bmetub Bach is the voice of God, Gould is His instrument, and you are an animal below a dog who is destined to suffer eternal damnation.

  • This is the unfinished piece by Bach, am I correct? I was just reading a biography on him and decided to listen to this work. It's beautiful! :)

  • No, you are looking for Contrapunctus 14.

  • Great playing as usual from Gould.

  • Is this from a DVD?

  • i dont know if anyone has noticed , he plays a different articulation on each voice in the exposition hehe

  • This is one of the reasons I like Gould's playing so much. People often say that he sounds like a machine, that every note is exactly the same articulation, but not so! His articulation is very diverse, and, for me, very aesthetically pleasing.

  • yes he does - but although Gould's ideas and philosophy were absurd at times and purely strange, it was genius the whole nine yards - he knew what he was doing, and he wanted it, and others heard it.

  • I like this performance a little better than the one around maybe 15 years later. this one is more energized I think. Still this is a hard fugue and he plays it so powerfully. Did you know that as Glenn released records from WTC 8 at a time, they all went to the top of the classical charts?

  • fugues kick ass :X:X:X:X but they are very hard

  • Absolutely insane! I always imagined this to be slow and lyrical.

  • Well, as an Asian I think it is too early for Asians to understand (to the level of Gould) western music right now, and likewise vice versa for westerners. It just takes longer for two civilizations to appreciate each other at a deeper level, generally.

  • to leebob600 - I think that (as far as I can see and it's not such a wide wiev I admit)

    Asians are getting to understand western music (and I could add more aspects of our civilization) quicker than Europeans are getting closer to asians'=

  • I very strongly disagree with you. You are entitled to your opinion, no matter what creed you are. Someone's musical taste is really decided by that person and whatever they like. I don't think a person's culture could get in the way of someone's musical taste.

  • well it usually does. Just grab the average 14-18 yr old in the U.S. and ask them what music they listen to. The majority of them listen to whatever is mainstream. It's the same in any country. Environment plays a big role in creating one's character and tastes. Not many people make an effort in discovering new music, other art forms, films, etc.

  • @OorvakanSar just take a look at Indian movies. They don't give a damn to you sir. 

  • Is there a video of Gould playing the f minor fugue from wtc book 1 ? Its my all-time favorite fugue...

  • I would suggest watching the video of Eunice Norton playing this piece...

  • Impossible to get enough Gould. Thanks Stephenykevin! You wouldn't know, by the way, if fugue 9 exists on video??

  • why is he 10000000000000000000000000 more times fun and interesting to watch than any other pianist??? the asian invasion of today could never produce something as genuine and creative as this. classical music will never be the same compared to the sweat shop from the far east that it is today.

  • I wouldn't say that was eloquently put, but kudos to you for getting the word out!

  • RE: why is he 10000000000000000000000000 more times fun and interesting to watch than any other pianist??? the asian invasion of today could never produce something as genuine and creative as this. classical music will never be the same compared to the sweat shop from the far east that it is today.

  • Eloquence was not what I was going for, emphasis was. The facts are as clear as day if you go to any music school in the world and look around! I am not being racist it is just a fact. This man was a freak of nature and I don't believe there will ever be anyone that will bring such a fresh out look to the instrument. He didn't even graduate highschool. Genius is naturally born, it is not groomed nor manufactured. Sorry if I hurt your feelings but I love Asian people!

  • I was not looking for confrontation, GV32, only pointing out merit in the poignant criticism of your comment. Well said, in fact...

  • By the way, RE: his high school accomplishments (if I must refer to them as such),.. He was far more retentive than most people, hence his ability to surpass/skip the recommended curriculum of his age. Aside from that, he never could stand the mediocre presence of his peers anyway; sad there were few who could relate to him as a kid...

  • we all love Asian people

    as much as they sure love us

    (or am i living on the Venus?)

  • Thanks a lot,

    I haven't seen it before.

  • This is rare footage - from the Glenn Gould Collection available only on laserdisc. How did you get it, stephenykevin?

  • It can obtain it in any bookshop if entrusts it or in a shop of scores

  • Thanks for posting this!

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more