Martha Argerich plays Bach toccata in C Minor BWV 911 PART 1

[uchihashadowgirl]

itz so pretty ^^ i wish i could find a cover in violin-_- ....

[0thereaper0]

who is better, me or Martha? I, that never played piano, or this very experienced and talented player? Is it now a matter of taste? Actually, there is one that is better than the other, at least in some ways. It is just hard to define, because there are very few people talented enough to say who is better.

[ragingsun1]

@0thereaper0 Hahahahaha no. That's poor logic. You're comparing to incomparable things. The correct analogy is Gould: Argerich, as they are both based on the grounds of talented and experienced players with respective interpretations of Bach. You are just a philistine. Please don't bring some boggling argument that stumps common sense and intuitive reasoning.

[0thereaper0]

@ragingsun1 All I can say is that you are stupid. I'm not trying to convince you, as previous attempts from my part to convince stupid people of their stupidity didn't work out.

[ragingsun1]

@0thereaper0 Stupid is a harsh word. For example, if I called you stupid just because you misused "that" in your appositive of (I, that never played piano), which should actually be who, I would be mean. If I called you stupid JUST because you used "attempts from my part", whereas it should be attempts ON my part, I would be mean. Your constant failure in common English idiomatic usage is embarrassing, yet I don't coin the term stupid regarding your state. You sir, are an idiot.

[0thereaper0]

@ragingsun1 lol, you are stupid.

[ragingsun1]

@0thereaper0 Great response. Dumbass fucker Brazilian gamer who doesn't know shit but trolling. That better on par of your sophistication level?

[jorgeoscar1000]

@dragmio capitalists and liberterians as gullible bufoons ??? hahahahahahahahahahahaha do you know you are a marxist gullible bufoon punk ? and you have taken line , bait and sinker ? punk you must be unemployed living of your parents funds like any other marxist bum !!!!!!

[jorgeoscar1000]

although i adore martha i think gould is the best interpreter of bach

[sdegrace]

It is very difficult to prove Bach on the piano. But Gould convince me.

[sdegrace]

It is very difficult to prove Bach on the piano.

[RomanVonEckstein]

Fantastica!

[MegaHypatia]

OSCENO QUESTO NON é BACH MA SOLO LE SUE NOTE........

[darkblueangel1956]

@MegaHypatia

Sono d'accordo ! Si sente troppo che la Argerich è completamente imbevuta di Prokofieff, Bartok e Liszt. Manca completamente il tono meditativo, e l'abbandono contemplativo. Esegue con la stessa spietata violenza anche Scarlatti. Prova a sentire come stritola completamente la Toccata in re min. quella con le note ribattute. Ho già espresso il mio disappunto su come esegue la Sonata in si min. di Liszt.

Un cordiale saluto a @MegaHypatia.

[andymission]

Mother Creator

~~ Loves You ~~

[polymath7]

@49josephgm

"Funny someone should mention Shakespeare. The real author wished to remain anonymous..."

Pure, unadulterated bullshit. There is absolutely no reason all to entertain the faintest murmur of suspicion that the author of Shakespeare's plays and poems is anyone other than Shakespeare.

At least, in declaring the author to be 'Anonymous', you're not one of those witless twits who think he can definitively prove it was (say) Francis Bacon or Edward De Vere.

[Cancrizans]

@polymath7 Ya...methinks that whole trend came from those academics so impressed with their own knowledge that they can't imagine that a natural gift for language and thought can produce beyond what they worked so hard to gain access to. "Oh, this guy doesn't have the credentials to write so well!!" Give me a break.

[2002FREDERICK]

GENIA MARTHAAAAA

QUE PARECIDO A GLENN POR DIOSSSS!!!!

LONG LIFE TO MARTHAAA!!!!!

[hypsophilus]

did you notice that the beginning of his piece is the same as cello suite 5?

[realdiep]

? What's the point? F

[dollys27]

I can't believe all the rudeness and obscenities posted in regard to the finest music the world has to offer. Really disgusting!

[dragmio]

I prefer Gould. Bach needs to be cold. Only then a warmth of another kind becomes obvious, and that is definitely not human warmth.

[rustyspo0ns]

@dragmio Ah ? Why should it be ? Maybe it only needs to be cold for you ? I don't find him cold.

[IpsaPaphum]

@dragmio Cold? Cool maybe, but warm is ok too as long as she doesn't sentimentalize the piece, which she doesn't in my opinion. A masterful performance.

[jewish1972]

muy bonito, pero esto keda siempre mejor en clavecin

[JamesTR4]

Liebromeistal... at least she doesn't hum all the freaking time... and let's see u win the chopin competition u jealous bastard ;)

[bochamdq]

hey!! hablen en castellano que no se les entiende un pomo...jaja

[Ellinidara]

lol Liebe...agree about King Glenn Gould...but Martha is Martha...lol...;) Do you really mean Martha isn't a REAL musician?...nononono...no...so­rry eh.

[DukeObjectivist]

good shizzle. and i think we all here know what shizzle is. especially you, cocoabutter147! You know what I mean--don't play dumb!

[SCHneiDen777]

so's your comment. (DiVeronica)

[DiVeronica]

that...doesn't make any sense at all

[SCHneiDen777]

Well, I meant that your comment was crap. Sorry for the confusion.

But I don't think the quality is bad, is it? If someone disagrees, please give me a thumb down, so I know. But I think the sound's ok, and the performance is good in my opinion.

[zurzica51]

another moron...

[DiVeronica]

lol just stating a fact brother.

[sonicsyndicate1111]

You've got a problem with your ears... it's not the quality.

[joycefeurring]

Stunning BACH

[lavepiano]

thank you for posting this amasing performance!!!!!! ome of the best interpretation

[XEA6L]

This interpretation is spellbinding! Excuse me, I have to go practice now...

[Irelandlass7789]

haha has the same effect on me!

[victoriaelle7]

I've listened to every Bach interpretation out there. Gould is too eccentric- Martha presents the purest interpretation thus far. Some pieces Gould wins me over but this one here is screaming Martha.

[pedradelencant2]

@victoriaelle7 Marta Argerich ens trasllada pau i recolliment. Gould pot arribar a excitar, a vegades. tots dos són interprets genials de Bach.

[formenlehre]

All I can say is that either Gould is good or Argerich is good. They cannot both be good (sarcasm).

[lamorlayefrance]

If you infer the "law of non-contradiction", the term good here is not exclusive and allows for many similar applications. Thus they can indeed both be "good".

[aremizo]

hello...sorry but Glenn Gould was very unstable and "excentrico"...he interrupt some

concerts "in situ" practically he do not realise concerts in hall their life !!! but Martha...she to realise hundreds of concerts !!! its recording of pieces of Bach of 1980 for Deusche Gramofon is skifull...as good as the Golberg Variations of Gould !!!

[debartzen]

¿Gould o Argerich?¡¿Gustav Leonhardt!?

[debartzen]

¿Argerich o Gould?¡¡¡Gustav Leonhardt!!!

[yourforte]

Goodness, there are some ignorant comments here about Argerich.

[thegoddescomposer]

wrong glenn gould is more beter than her ,,,,,,, glenn gould is genius marta just a pianist,, glenn gould was the only way to perfection

[redthgs]

Who is better??? Gould or Argerich?? Stupid Questions!!!

It is a matter of taste and mood... different artists, different interpretations! No one is really better! If everybody would play the pieces exactly like, it would be boring...

Embrace the variations... Just Enjoy it!

[DukeObjectivist]

Greetings!! My name is Phinnheus Alderburry! I write to you from a land far away due, in part, to the Miracle of the interweb-net. I do propose a question as a follow-up to yours: Whom do you think is a superior craftsman of the ivory keyboard: Argerich or Mozart? SIncerest of thanks to you and your kindreds!

[Ignitethestarz]

@redthgs yes! Thank you:)

[polymath7]

God, that tedious sentiment expressed (and roundly endorsed) yet again!

These certainly are not stupid questions. They are necessary ones, even if they may prove difficult to definitively answer.

I agree that in this case it's too close to call with any firmly settled confidence, and music is certainly not among the subjects in which I'd hazard to call myself an expert; but one most definitely can and must compare artists, and one most definitely can and must say some are better than others.

[faraz1729]

@polymath7

"one most definitely can and must compare artists, and one most definitely can and must say some are better than others."

Compare, sure. Deem better, not really. Unless you're comparing two people of blatantly differing calibers (say me and Richter), the word better is utterly meaningless. For instance, what would it REALLY mean for person A to say that Richter played a Chopin etude "better" than Horowitz? Person B can turn around and say Horowitz played it better.

[polymath7]

I.

This is quite a coincidence. Not ten minutes ago I was replying to a year-old comment of yours on another Martha Argerich video.

The word *better* may lack a clear and specific referent, but I would insist it does not then follow that is this context is at all meaningless.

Picasso is a better artist than Braque.

You may say that's a relatively easy comparison because some of their work is very similar, but I have no difficulty at all in seeing and saying that Picasso is also...

[polymath7]

II

...a better artist than Franz Hals.

Shakespeare is a better writer than Thomas Kyd or Ben Jonson or even Christopher Marlowe, but he's also -pretty clearly- a better writer than James Joyce or Marcel Proust (and I *love* both Joyce and Proust). In principal I see no reason at all one cannot make a confident value judgment between Wren and Wright, Monet and Matisse, Argerich and Gould.

But so far I'm just question-begging.

I can say more or less exactly what I men by "better" and "artist"...

[polymath7]

III

...but it would take a bit of time...

[psnapplebee]

@polymath7 look, there's no shakespeare of piano performance. no one touches that level of quality. shakespeare > proust but gould isn't shakespeare.

I say Argerich and Gould are pretty debatable, preferential.

[Cancrizans]

@psnapplebee IMO there should never be a competitive atmosphere in art bc nothing robs art more than aggression and competition. You may encourage more consistently technical performances through competition by emphasizing competition amongst artists, but you diminish everything that we truly value about art during the process. Obviously which recordings you prefer is mostly preference, but Gould was considerably more than a pianist, especially in this repertoire, and it should be recognized.

[polymath7]

@Cancrizans

Dead wrong.

Nothing *but* competition results in great art, and absolutely nothing -*nothing*- is more deleterious to art than egalitarianism.

Egalitarianism, and the obsequious courting of mediocrity, has all but completely destroyed the humanities.

[Cancrizans]

@polymath7 I think you mistake the unfortunate consequences of an artist having to exist in a petty and inhuman world for the art itself. Do you think competition created the deep contemplation and peace found in the works of Bach? Or the complex passion of Beethoven? No, these expressions come from the depths of the soul, and represent a longing for the end of petty squabbles and person vs. person nonsense. This music seeks to unite us, not make us use art as simply another weapon.

[polymath7]

@Cancrizans

I notice you cite Bach and Beethoven, not Krebbs and von Weber, or Elton John and Andrew Loydd Weber. Not often does someone so skillfully prove my point for me.

[dragmio]

@polymath7 Cut the propaganda. Competition is not the father of everything. Capitalism is not everything. Free market is not everything. Especially it isn't brilliant art. If you want to buy and sell, go to a market. It can be a "free market" too, for all I care. But stop trying to make capitalism the cornerstone to universe and everything in it. True art cannot be bought nor sold. Go check Dow Jones and STFU...

[polymath7]

@dragmio What is your definition of propaganda? Your use of that word as an all-purpose perjorative is curious.

What I'm saying has absolutely nothing to do with markets, and indeed I detest laissez faire capitalists and so called "libertarians" as scoundrels and gullible buffoons.

But everything done by humans is done far better by some than others, and refusing to recognize this benefits only the mediocre -if even them.

If you disagree, why are youhere instead of an Alicia Keys video?

[dragmio]

@polymath7 In that case you should stop praising "competition". Egos compete, art does not.

[polymath7]

@polymath7

*in* this context

[polymath7]

@redthgs

I probably owe you a bit of an apology. I'm so irritated by the sentiment you seemed on the verge of expressing that I'm a little quick to shove words into people's mouths at the first scent of it.

You see, the well-meaning notion that all artistic opinions are more or less equally valid is in effect identical to the ruinous notion that *no* artistic opinions are *at all* valid.

[11Kralle]

@redthgs

If M. Agerich does not sing on records, if she had not overdubbed and reoverdubbed their recordings, if she plays in a constantly high level and if she does not appear on foolhardy tv-shows (telling how play anything), then she is the better than goody-ol-gould. Basta!

[redthgs]

@11Kralle

I play Piano by myself and had the honor to play at the Gewandhaus Leipig and the pleasure to meet Mrs Argerich! No doubt that she is very kind and plays in a constantly high level . Gould is quite an obstinate artist but like i said, both of them play flawless and in their very own style. But the question who is better is redundant. Its still a matter of taste, basta! :)

[11Kralle]

@redthgs

Have you ever met Gould? Dig you ever saw him performing on stage? In my musicology-studies if had to analize Gould´s recording from the Goldberg-Variations, and - as you may concede - they appeared not to be played in one setting. He had his moments, but there was to much of his quirks about him - and even more `less of pure music´. Its a matter of taste (like the preferable sounding of the gewandhaus, i guess). Since you have repeated my basta, I agree with it! (basta?)

[Mortimer123]

kingstravinsky101 - The incredible accomplishments of Glenn Gould take absolutely nothing away from Argerich, and most definitely do not mean she is "2d rate at best." The musicians and critics the world over have agreed for decades that Argerich is one of the greatest pianists in the history of the instrument. Your gross invective against this universally recognized musical genius merely shows that you are an ignorant fool.

[indigoblue555]

May I suggest that you (and me and all of us)

can heartily appreciate a soloist but not in all his renditions.I love Gould playing the English Suites and dislike his performance of the toccatas,eventhough I listen to them however.Equally I love this toccata perf.by

Argerich but hardly can stand her Scarlatti

K 141 on YT (you're aware of it for sure)-

P.S.- respectfully talking ..if a newcomer could get bored at Gould playing what shall he do if listening to Pogorelich...- Greetings!

[aldebussy]

I am committing suicide the day she dies.

[anelacadillo]

yeaaah!!1 lol!! me too. =P

[asorescu]

Martha's and Glenn Gould's interpretations are both sublime, however different in style. Bach in Gould's interpretation is actually very interesting and transcendent, in my opinion. This is why he is intensely loved by so many...

[aldebussy]

Interestingly, they're often deemed similar because she is not a romantic Bach interpretor and very few have kept that tradition.

[laqin007]

what the hell dumbass?!

[aldebussy]

I am in LOVE WITH HER TOUCH

[AlsatianCousin]

Finally someone understands what toccata means. Kudos.