FYI at the beginning of the video the narrator said:
"The eminent pianist and pedagogue Professor Heinrich Gustavovich Neuhaus noted that when Richter is playing different composers, it always seems like you are not only listening to different pianos, different sounds - but also different pianists. Every time the pianist is different."
@classicalmusicagent Who cares? you've been stalking every page where anyone posts Richter's recordings of Debussy. Your comments are usually between irrelevant and asinine. why don't you create a channel for Grigori Latsabidze and post his recordings and write your paeans to his art there.
this concert of Richter is one of the most importtant documents left about this artist. His conception of the works ans the rythmical execution are astonishing. Thats a level not easy to get there....
We had the privilege of Richter coming and playing for us at the Royal College of Music whilst I was a student there. I will never forget it - phenomenal! My video response includes Ondine...
Parecchie volte Richter ha un rapporto quasi furioso col pianoforte.... Improvvise accelerazioni ... Sembra quasi che sia pervaso da una angoscia del suonare... a volte non mi prende come dovrebbe.. non saprei bene.. Straordinario talento e musicalità... mah... qualcuno mi può spiegare meglio??
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Is that array of dissonances and pseudo tunes supposed to be music? Do people actually REALLY like this or do they pretend for sake of pretense? Funny to note that animals revolt against this whereas humans politely clap. Proof in the pudding: Cows yield more milk to Mozart played to them in the stable and will dry up and go berserk when exposed to this "modern" stuff over and over. Even my pets agree with me. They boycott & flee dissonances, but pur to Mozart & any nice tunes per se. LOL.
i also had problems with the access to the music of debussy and ravel at the beginning. But when you have looked close to this music you will find the importance of search in sound and all the beautiful harmonies which opens then a new world to you... good luck and don t close yourself from discovering ...
Let's settle this argument by quoting the great Jerry Lee Lewis: "Rock'n'Roll is the BEST music." End quote. As for one, methinks nobody has ever felt depressed after a good shot of Rock'n'Roll. Happy those who can play R'n'R piano really well. I wonder why those super composers never actually tried themselves and why we never hear a simple, but superbe Boogie Woogie as an encore by those super pianists who seem to have 20 fingers on each hand.Cheers.
@12rosebud12 you must be a bovine creature then by your account! quote all you like from 5 minute wonders like lewis he will be forgotten in a hundred years whereas this will continue so go back to your simple tunes!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA THAT'S HILARIOUS!!! OMG! YOU ARE SOOOOOO RIGHT!!! Listen asshole, there are huge differences between humans and animals, and trying to make some sort of comparison between their taste in music and ours is asinine. I can only come to one conclusion from reading your horrendous excuse for an opinion: you are a cow. You are a big, fat, sloppy cow disguised as a human. I imagine the other cows exiled you for your superior cow intelligence, and you decided to mask yourself as human.
Yes. People actually REALLY like this. I think it's beautiful. I don't think this music would still be performed a hundred years later if it was all for the sake of pretense.
You aren't seriously trying to judge music by using animal reaction as a criterion, are you? I hope you are trying to be funny. (I mean--cows and Mozart? Should we all now chew the cud to develop musical sensibility? I laughed hard at that.) Anyway, yes, people do love Debussy very much. I didn't at first, but then you find that dissonance and sheer tone color can create moments of beauty.
For any1 who doesn't speak Russian, the announcer says that a famous professor said about richer that each time u listen to him play a diff composer its like hearing a diff pianist every time..
At the very beginning I mostly listened and at that time, I did not know much about the critics and comments, still I was very much impressed by Richter's playing as such. Then I found out composers & performers praised him. Then I compared his to others and liked it even more ;-)
eirikpilot, it can be just a matter of taste, then it's ok. But I heard those comments from people with bad taste or too queer sensitiveness (that pushes them to preferring performances by Elton John ;-)
I quite enjoy richters playing. It is comparatively "dryer" or more straight than other performances, but this isnt black and white. His playing isnt "dead", or "cold" like some people say.
What a beautiful room!! Where is that, does anyone know?? St.Petersburg, Moskva?
Svyatoslav Richter 's very versatile: Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Chopin, Ravel & so on:
Pure beauty, intellectual insight and emotion.
(As to those litlle "smithersher..." or "marcemom...", dear Nietzschemasterclass, their obessission with Richter is far more complex :-), I know their tastes, akin to Gavrlov's vision of "art"="it's fantastic, i'm in plastic")
Petty "sensitiveness" hates grandeur, honesty and power you can find in Richter ' s performances
(1) What it calls my attention about guys like ShmitS's comments is that he tries hard to encourage all of us to use our sensibility in order to convert a bunch of signs in something far away different than the meaning itself of those signs called music. On one hand I believe that most of us have enough sensibility, I don't think that we as an audience here "metronomizes" the music first in order to decode it and then "feel" it properly according to ShmitS's guidance.
(2) All of us have our own personal way of felling the music. It is totally subjective. On the other hand, this particular look of ShmitS "The D'Artagnan look", makes me believe that he is truly possessed by this kind of "romantic saver of poverty", in this case: our poverty of souls, mediocre, distorted, narrow, and primitive minds who given our ignorance and lack of sensibility are not capable to distinguish between what is worth or not when feeling the music through certain interpreter.
(3) He tries to brake, in his own belief and selfish conception, the musical rules if there exist at some point about listening and playing certain work but he gets caught in the same way. He is trapped in his own way of thinking, converting the subjectivity of music into a logical thought, his logical thought, and reconverted back again to his own convenience and therefore to his subjective form.
(4) The final result is that we have a new music redeemer, a soul saver who is going to take us out from the darkness and to teach us how we must conceive music in a proper way. It's a contradiction. His conception is based on a false premise. If there is a person who metronomizes the music is him but won't accept it because of his paranoid and grappled mind. If the term metronome means "speed per se", then the artifact would be designed just from the middle to the top of it.
(5) Music is subjective, that's the best understood concept in a person with the minimum level of intelligence though what I've noticed that ShmitS and many others do here, is to listen over and over again a musician -- paradoxically hated by all of them- who felt the music deep in his heart, deep in his soul and expressed with passion, love, humble and honesty. If we can be sure of something is that Richter was an authentic and genuine musician whether you like him or not.
(6) There is no doubt that he was a sensible and superb human being and Shmits or anyone else will not take it out from him definitely. ShmitS is just lonely person who tries to call attention by this means. He is just trying to hide away his fears, his mediocrity and his loneliness making us believe that he is an intellectual gifted person.
Someone here described his page perfectly: "The house of terror". That resumes the truly essence of a loser.
no wait, richter aint gay, wait, is he!!?? I thought horowitz was the only famous homopianist(well, yeah, i know, Tchaikovski). well, homepianists are exceptionally good and sensational, so base on that, you can say Richter is so good, he must be a homopianist.
Why does he have to be differentiated as a pianist because of his sexuality??? I am confsed. One could he be just identified as one of the best pianist of all time period????? I don't get it.
Rosina Lehvinne was a great pianist. She personally taught Van Cliburn, Daniel Pollack, and other pianists. And they all have said that Lehvinne was extraordinary. Lehvinne was the symbol of the Russian School of music. She was a great person, don't mock her.
If all your knowledge of the music Richter played is gained from You tube you are not a lover of music but a hunter, only interested in looks, not the depth. If you're really interested in Richter, listen to his records, ignoring Soviet propaganda that tried to turn his image into one of a robot.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Lipatti... Your notion that people can't "disagree on Richter" is comfortingly...
hilarious.Mrs. Lhevinne was a relative of one of the most anti-musical anti human musicians who ever lived.Lhevinne played music like a mechanical dirge. You love music interpreted
Try and see Richter the artist not the technician in those records which you won't find on You Tube. Maybe you'll be less of a loner than you seem. Throw aside your prejudices. Good luck!
What small and irrelevant people like you and me have to say about Richter and his art means nothing. When you and I will be nothing but ashes, Richter's art will still fascinate, inspire and enthrall. I'm sure you have a lot more venom and purported wit in that contrarian mind of yours, but that too, like everything else you say, is irrelevant.
Smith, you're delirious, paranoid, pessimistic, whiny and ignorant.
You disgust me and everybody else. You don't need to comment anymore because we as usual know your reactions. We know you're there. Don't worry. Just keep your mouth shut.
What Debussy communicated about his music through the imperfect medium of the piano roll is certainly noteworthy. But Debussy was a mediocre pianist, and there are many ways of playing the same piece and the composer's way is not the only one.
You have a bad habit of talking nonsense about Richter, although his way with Debussy is nothing short of extraordinary. When Rosina Lhevinne heard him play Debussy in 1960 she remarked that, finally, someone had emerged who was able to play Debussy's music the right way, that is in a way she had previously thought was simply impossible. There are things people can disagree on, but Richter's towering stature in the history of piano playing is not one of them.
Why do you insist on littering the world with your ignorance? Debussy was, self-confessedly, a semi-professional pianist who repeatedly acknowledged having difficulty playing his own music.
Richter's Debussy was definitely more impressionistic and imaginative than Michelangeli's though technically there was little to choose between them. Gieseking, while displaying an instinctive identity with Debussy, was technically the inferior of Richter and Michelangeli.
I wouldn't say that Gieseking's technique is "inferior" to Richter's and Michelangeli's. Gieseking was born with one of the most intuitive, colorful and supple pianistic mechanisms. His is not necessarily a virtuosic technique, but it is just as refined as R's and M's.
Fair comment, alborada55. I do detect the occasional technical problem in some of the Preludes, but Gieseking was otherwise a great Debussy interpreter and certainly possessed one of the quickest minds in music. And yes, he did have a refined and elegant style.
O mother it is so beautiful because an emo pianist is playing emo preludes by emo composer! Especially the first prelude was so tight, it was geniusness, the second one was done to fast and too mechanical and robotic for my preference but hey he's pretty tight!
This has been flagged as spam show
FYI at the beginning of the video the narrator said:
"The eminent pianist and pedagogue Professor Heinrich Gustavovich Neuhaus noted that when Richter is playing different composers, it always seems like you are not only listening to different pianos, different sounds - but also different pianists. Every time the pianist is different."
mitsulancer5 10 months ago
Comment removed
mitsulancer5 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I profoundly prefer Giorgi Latsabidze's Interpretation for Debussy)))
classicalmusicagent 11 months ago
@classicalmusicagent Who cares? you've been stalking every page where anyone posts Richter's recordings of Debussy. Your comments are usually between irrelevant and asinine. why don't you create a channel for Grigori Latsabidze and post his recordings and write your paeans to his art there.
NotAgain90 10 months ago
@NotAgain90
Oh... Mr. Marco Cerutti a.k.a. Artsitdehonore, BachBeethBrahmsLiszt, classicalmusicagent, classicamadeus, ChopinFufmanChris, charismartist, DebussyClassics, dolcealan, glatsabid, Hellerhans2, hindemthify, IGduo, Joeuscusr, michaellugansky, paiazzo099, Perryann100, PhilarmonicSociety, SchumanClassicAUSTRA.... has already created multiple fake accounts desperately promoting Giorgi Latsabidze.
truecrypt 10 months ago
this concert of Richter is one of the most importtant documents left about this artist. His conception of the works ans the rythmical execution are astonishing. Thats a level not easy to get there....
uhartchristian 1 year ago 6
We had the privilege of Richter coming and playing for us at the Royal College of Music whilst I was a student there. I will never forget it - phenomenal! My video response includes Ondine...
ChristopherLangdown 1 year ago
Comment removed
ChristopherLangdown 1 year ago
Parecchie volte Richter ha un rapporto quasi furioso col pianoforte.... Improvvise accelerazioni ... Sembra quasi che sia pervaso da una angoscia del suonare... a volte non mi prende come dovrebbe.. non saprei bene.. Straordinario talento e musicalità... mah... qualcuno mi può spiegare meglio??
ilovescarlatti 1 year ago
this video has only 71632 views??? WHY??
manabikos 1 year ago
Comment removed
LARSE42 1 year ago
Comment removed
LARSE42 1 year ago
Comment removed
LARSE42 1 year ago
Comment removed
LARSE42 1 year ago
Comment removed
LARSE42 1 year ago
ondine is the third movement of Gaspard the la niut by Maurice Ravel, not Debussy
richclayderman 1 year ago
@richclayderman
Ondine is the FIRST movement of Gaspard DE LA NUIT.
This is a different Ondine, the Prelude, Book II, No.7, by.yes, Debussy!!
Thanks for your "expertise", kid.
Next time, LEARN yor facts before you STATE them.
snaaptaker 1 year ago
@snaaptaker man I can talk some shit sometimes!
richclayderman 1 year ago
@richclayderman
"Your" facts, that is.
snaaptaker 1 year ago
Violent !! comic !!! Tom & Jerry style !! Richter back to school !! and a bit of feelings !!!
51hereiam 2 years ago
Just amazing!
kuglagerfeld 2 years ago
Le début est bon mais aprés c'est trop brutal ; Richter sait pourtant trés bien jouer Debussy ....
lklkhjhjdfs 2 years ago
Interprêté à la scie à métaux par le brutal Helmut Richter, raide comme un piquet. Nul.
totalannihilator99 2 years ago
fabuleux
uhartchristian 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Is that array of dissonances and pseudo tunes supposed to be music? Do people actually REALLY like this or do they pretend for sake of pretense? Funny to note that animals revolt against this whereas humans politely clap. Proof in the pudding: Cows yield more milk to Mozart played to them in the stable and will dry up and go berserk when exposed to this "modern" stuff over and over. Even my pets agree with me. They boycott & flee dissonances, but pur to Mozart & any nice tunes per se. LOL.
12rosebud12 2 years ago
i also had problems with the access to the music of debussy and ravel at the beginning. But when you have looked close to this music you will find the importance of search in sound and all the beautiful harmonies which opens then a new world to you... good luck and don t close yourself from discovering ...
uhartchristian 2 years ago
Let's settle this argument by quoting the great Jerry Lee Lewis: "Rock'n'Roll is the BEST music." End quote. As for one, methinks nobody has ever felt depressed after a good shot of Rock'n'Roll. Happy those who can play R'n'R piano really well. I wonder why those super composers never actually tried themselves and why we never hear a simple, but superbe Boogie Woogie as an encore by those super pianists who seem to have 20 fingers on each hand.Cheers.
12rosebud12 2 years ago
I do know of an established classical pianst that always plays the simpsons intro theme as an encore, so yea never say never.
andyo0035 2 years ago
@12rosebud12 you must be a bovine creature then by your account! quote all you like from 5 minute wonders like lewis he will be forgotten in a hundred years whereas this will continue so go back to your simple tunes!
afertyus1000 10 months ago
@uhartchristian very sorry, but I accidently gave you the thumbs down. Meant to give it to the comment above, but don't know how to undo it.
this probably seems a little random.
scottishear 1 year ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA THAT'S HILARIOUS!!! OMG! YOU ARE SOOOOOO RIGHT!!! Listen asshole, there are huge differences between humans and animals, and trying to make some sort of comparison between their taste in music and ours is asinine. I can only come to one conclusion from reading your horrendous excuse for an opinion: you are a cow. You are a big, fat, sloppy cow disguised as a human. I imagine the other cows exiled you for your superior cow intelligence, and you decided to mask yourself as human.
koukides666 2 years ago 5
this is the internet; your trying too hard.
peppersprayinthebutt 2 years ago
Yes. People actually REALLY like this. I think it's beautiful. I don't think this music would still be performed a hundred years later if it was all for the sake of pretense.
Animals aren't always the best judge of things.
brenonion 2 years ago 2
You aren't seriously trying to judge music by using animal reaction as a criterion, are you? I hope you are trying to be funny. (I mean--cows and Mozart? Should we all now chew the cud to develop musical sensibility? I laughed hard at that.) Anyway, yes, people do love Debussy very much. I didn't at first, but then you find that dissonance and sheer tone color can create moments of beauty.
xiangyik 2 years ago
I judge music by how it sounds, not by how much milk a cow puts out - but hey whatever you need to comprehend you should use.
Don't forget to feed the chickens
spookyben 2 years ago
I shit more rapidly when hearing Mozart....you must be correct.
iamthebirdman888 2 years ago
Nobody plays Debussy the way Richter did. The most poetic, evocative, almost visual pianism I have ever heard.
smudgepots 2 years ago 2
Focus and intensity.Great!!
jfsangora 2 years ago
For any1 who doesn't speak Russian, the announcer says that a famous professor said about richer that each time u listen to him play a diff composer its like hearing a diff pianist every time..
darkmaides 3 years ago
Give me Richter, and Sofrinitsky, and even if all else is for naught i would die a happy fella.
Lukecash12 3 years ago
This is brilliant playing, yes - but have you heard Michelangeli's historic recordings of Debussy?
JoFrSc 3 years ago
He's so involved in the big picture that he loses some of the more beautiful moments in the piece. It's like somebody trying to speed-read Mallarme.
keelan111 3 years ago
Comment removed
3boudewijn 2 years ago
keelan111: This is a very smart remark!
3boudewijn 2 years ago
LOVE IT LOVE IT LOVE IT
i have an audio recording of this which i have listened to many a times over many a years and i still love it... :_)
earthypig 3 years ago 2
it's great
katjapoljakova 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this should have been played on a bluthner concert grand...the steinway is too bright and not the sound what claude would have wanted.
eddietwang 3 years ago
Tnk u for your insight..
darkmaides 3 years ago
One of the greatest pianists of all times. For me he is the greatest. I was hypnotized while I was listening this performance.
vladimirgligoric 3 years ago 2
Завораживает...
nemesida7 3 years ago
it's amazing that he can play the repeated roll with a curved hand.
DougtheAsian 3 years ago
well in most cases, deeper
francorussie 3 years ago 2
At the very beginning I mostly listened and at that time, I did not know much about the critics and comments, still I was very much impressed by Richter's playing as such. Then I found out composers & performers praised him. Then I compared his to others and liked it even more ;-)
eirikpilot, it can be just a matter of taste, then it's ok. But I heard those comments from people with bad taste or too queer sensitiveness (that pushes them to preferring performances by Elton John ;-)
francorussie 3 years ago
I quite enjoy richters playing. It is comparatively "dryer" or more straight than other performances, but this isnt black and white. His playing isnt "dead", or "cold" like some people say.
What a beautiful room!! Where is that, does anyone know?? St.Petersburg, Moskva?
eirikpilot 4 years ago
This is the Big Hall (Bolshoy Zal) of the Moscow Conservatory.
truecrypt 4 years ago 2
Spaziba..
eirikpilot 4 years ago
Svyatoslav Richter 's very versatile: Prokofiev, Rachmaninov, Chopin, Ravel & so on:
Pure beauty, intellectual insight and emotion.
(As to those litlle "smithersher..." or "marcemom...", dear Nietzschemasterclass, their obessission with Richter is far more complex :-), I know their tastes, akin to Gavrlov's vision of "art"="it's fantastic, i'm in plastic")
Petty "sensitiveness" hates grandeur, honesty and power you can find in Richter ' s performances
P.S. sorry, did not mean "spam".
francorussie 3 years ago 3
P.P.S. I meant obsession & based on their comments, you can see there is obsession
francorussie 3 years ago
re u crazy? - very peculiar n strange!
kajohada 3 years ago
To all music lovers:
(1) What it calls my attention about guys like ShmitS's comments is that he tries hard to encourage all of us to use our sensibility in order to convert a bunch of signs in something far away different than the meaning itself of those signs called music. On one hand I believe that most of us have enough sensibility, I don't think that we as an audience here "metronomizes" the music first in order to decode it and then "feel" it properly according to ShmitS's guidance.
nietzschemasterclass 4 years ago
(2) All of us have our own personal way of felling the music. It is totally subjective. On the other hand, this particular look of ShmitS "The D'Artagnan look", makes me believe that he is truly possessed by this kind of "romantic saver of poverty", in this case: our poverty of souls, mediocre, distorted, narrow, and primitive minds who given our ignorance and lack of sensibility are not capable to distinguish between what is worth or not when feeling the music through certain interpreter.
nietzschemasterclass 4 years ago
(3) He tries to brake, in his own belief and selfish conception, the musical rules if there exist at some point about listening and playing certain work but he gets caught in the same way. He is trapped in his own way of thinking, converting the subjectivity of music into a logical thought, his logical thought, and reconverted back again to his own convenience and therefore to his subjective form.
nietzschemasterclass 4 years ago
(4) The final result is that we have a new music redeemer, a soul saver who is going to take us out from the darkness and to teach us how we must conceive music in a proper way. It's a contradiction. His conception is based on a false premise. If there is a person who metronomizes the music is him but won't accept it because of his paranoid and grappled mind. If the term metronome means "speed per se", then the artifact would be designed just from the middle to the top of it.
nietzschemasterclass 4 years ago
(5) Music is subjective, that's the best understood concept in a person with the minimum level of intelligence though what I've noticed that ShmitS and many others do here, is to listen over and over again a musician -- paradoxically hated by all of them- who felt the music deep in his heart, deep in his soul and expressed with passion, love, humble and honesty. If we can be sure of something is that Richter was an authentic and genuine musician whether you like him or not.
nietzschemasterclass 4 years ago
(6) There is no doubt that he was a sensible and superb human being and Shmits or anyone else will not take it out from him definitely. ShmitS is just lonely person who tries to call attention by this means. He is just trying to hide away his fears, his mediocrity and his loneliness making us believe that he is an intellectual gifted person.
Someone here described his page perfectly: "The house of terror". That resumes the truly essence of a loser.
nietzschemasterclass 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A (Gorgeously precise) funeral for this music.
smithsherman 4 years ago
Gorgeous! Such precision!
aldebussy 4 years ago
He was one of the best homosexual pianists of all time.
philaufan6 4 years ago
no wait, richter aint gay, wait, is he!!?? I thought horowitz was the only famous homopianist(well, yeah, i know, Tchaikovski). well, homepianists are exceptionally good and sensational, so base on that, you can say Richter is so good, he must be a homopianist.
jimmyjamesWang 4 years ago
Yes is was a homosexual and very open about it.
philaufan6 4 years ago
from where do you know?did you f**k with him?
ieronim2003 4 years ago
No I found it in Wikipedia you pr**k
philaufan6 4 years ago
Why does he have to be differentiated as a pianist because of his sexuality??? I am confsed. One could he be just identified as one of the best pianist of all time period????? I don't get it.
Hervinbalfour 2 years ago 3
Well I guess I don't get it either. I like Richter. I also like Shura Cherkassky.
philaufan6 2 years ago
Wake up KM!...I was talking about Joseph Lhevinne.
smithsherman 4 years ago
Rosina Lehvinne was a great pianist. She personally taught Van Cliburn, Daniel Pollack, and other pianists. And they all have said that Lehvinne was extraordinary. Lehvinne was the symbol of the Russian School of music. She was a great person, don't mock her.
kmjaemo 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I am a "hunter" a establishment
advocated equine refuse.Richter on "Record"
is no more human in his music than at Youtube.
He plays as the very embodiment of Stalinist revisionism irrespective of his own individual relationship to the KGB.
smithsherman 4 years ago
A post to smithsherman.
If all your knowledge of the music Richter played is gained from You tube you are not a lover of music but a hunter, only interested in looks, not the depth. If you're really interested in Richter, listen to his records, ignoring Soviet propaganda that tried to turn his image into one of a robot.
panemil 4 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Lipatti... Your notion that people can't "disagree on Richter" is comfortingly...
hilarious.Mrs. Lhevinne was a relative of one of the most anti-musical anti human musicians who ever lived.Lhevinne played music like a mechanical dirge. You love music interpreted
like a military marching band.
smithsherman 4 years ago
Try and see Richter the artist not the technician in those records which you won't find on You Tube. Maybe you'll be less of a loner than you seem. Throw aside your prejudices. Good luck!
panemil 4 years ago 5
Richter - Schubert Sonata in G major (You tube)
panemil 4 years ago 2
What small and irrelevant people like you and me have to say about Richter and his art means nothing. When you and I will be nothing but ashes, Richter's art will still fascinate, inspire and enthrall. I'm sure you have a lot more venom and purported wit in that contrarian mind of yours, but that too, like everything else you say, is irrelevant.
richterfreak 4 years ago 17
Smith, you're delirious, paranoid, pessimistic, whiny and ignorant.
You disgust me and everybody else. You don't need to comment anymore because we as usual know your reactions. We know you're there. Don't worry. Just keep your mouth shut.
aldebussy 4 years ago 7
Dear Lipatt, That you regard Debussy's insight into the music that came through him as ..."ignorant hucksterism"...is precious...to say the least.
smithsherman 4 years ago
What Debussy communicated about his music through the imperfect medium of the piano roll is certainly noteworthy. But Debussy was a mediocre pianist, and there are many ways of playing the same piece and the composer's way is not the only one.
lipatti1942 4 years ago
You have a bad habit of talking nonsense about Richter, although his way with Debussy is nothing short of extraordinary. When Rosina Lhevinne heard him play Debussy in 1960 she remarked that, finally, someone had emerged who was able to play Debussy's music the right way, that is in a way she had previously thought was simply impossible. There are things people can disagree on, but Richter's towering stature in the history of piano playing is not one of them.
lipatti1942 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Excellent piece, I found free sheet music for it on SheetMusicFox DOT com and absolutely love it!
ninaboyarsky 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's a good thing that Richter knows how to play
Debussy's music in a totally different way than
Debussy did,because otherwise we might get the impression that Debussy knew how to play his own music......
smithsherman 4 years ago
Why do you insist on littering the world with your ignorance? Debussy was, self-confessedly, a semi-professional pianist who repeatedly acknowledged having difficulty playing his own music.
lipatti1942 4 years ago
Richter's Debussy was definitely more impressionistic and imaginative than Michelangeli's though technically there was little to choose between them. Gieseking, while displaying an instinctive identity with Debussy, was technically the inferior of Richter and Michelangeli.
lyhpcl 4 years ago
I wouldn't say that Gieseking's technique is "inferior" to Richter's and Michelangeli's. Gieseking was born with one of the most intuitive, colorful and supple pianistic mechanisms. His is not necessarily a virtuosic technique, but it is just as refined as R's and M's.
alborada55 4 years ago
Fair comment, alborada55. I do detect the occasional technical problem in some of the Preludes, but Gieseking was otherwise a great Debussy interpreter and certainly possessed one of the quickest minds in music. And yes, he did have a refined and elegant style.
lyhpcl 4 years ago
you have a point there. Have your heard Zimerman´s Debussy? It´s fantastics!
rolandonavarro 4 years ago
cool
orpheus63 4 years ago
He's lost none of that enormous presence from aging, that's for sure. Technique it also mostly intact. There's a great pianist.
GreatPianists 4 years ago
O mother it is so beautiful because an emo pianist is playing emo preludes by emo composer! Especially the first prelude was so tight, it was geniusness, the second one was done to fast and too mechanical and robotic for my preference but hey he's pretty tight!
FleaLovesCuticle 4 years ago
GENIUS!!!!!
ghardvyu 4 years ago
Interesting to compare this with Michelangeli's version. I think I prefer this one, it's even more "atmospheric".
busoniliszt 5 years ago
woa..power....Richter
canardroti 5 years ago
i love youtube
barelyapianist 5 years ago
Indeed
etucker82 5 years ago
amazing. what a find!
crowe 5 years ago