Cliburn has the most imaginative approach. I like the way he brings out the left hand theme on the last page. He is also sensitive to Rachmaninoff's nostalgia.
a sublime piece performed by three excellent pianists, but I would really love to listen to Rachmaninoff himself playing this............ wish if I could.
Ashkenazy is lyrically divine on this piece being neither overbearing nor feeble, so , in my opinion this is the very best performance of this piece on youtube, both technically and emotionally. Crisp, effervescent, manly.
I adored all but liked Van Cliburn's marginally the best. Absolutely incredible. He is doing so many different things. Each artist expresses his own communication with the work and each is interesting, so a bit silly to compare however. I played this work about 12 years ago.
I like Van Cliburn's the best... because right at 4:08 that deep bass note sounds soooo good! Plus he seems to bring out the harmonic structure of the left hand very carefully.
That bass note is marked piano, and the one before which he plays louder is marked mf. If you wanna hear a stunning rendityion of this piece, listen to Lugansky play it (Verbier festival recording is best)
@ReturnOfTheStienway i didnt mean to sound like a buzz kill, bein moany about a time.. those dramatic bass notes are the ones that give me goose bumps anyway so i know what u mean
To me Richter's playing of this prelude is in a class by itself -- wild, on the edge, even a little dangerous; without a trace of sentimentality (just like Rachmaninoff himself, as someone pointed out). He unfolds a sweeping musical line from beginning to end -- brilliant, powerful. The others are ok, but sound to me somewhat timid, sentimental, and disjointed by comparison.
@muellerpiano I entirely agree - there is something almost magical about his interpretation - as though he is privy to some deep dark diabolical secret that only he can reveal and expose and thus elevate our consciousness through his unique insight.
For the listener, it's all about personal tastes. No two people hear the same thing. It's personal likes and dislikes. Unless the composition is butchered, interpretation is in the listeners's ear. From the musician's standpoint, it's all about motor function. No two pianists have the same motor function. It gets to a point where there can be no further enhancement of motor function. The best are those who can push them furthest. All of these pianists mentioned have mastered their motor skills.
Richter had a way with Rachman this is the high road.VanCliburn is more than wonderful here &less romantic ( i was surprised it was him)not unlike RACH playing he left hundreds of recs so we do know indeed.Gavrilov would have been a good incl here.Kocsis too is str n da concerti.Geiseking believe it was da first rec of #3! I wanna hear his Rach.
Cliburn is amazing to me, it is the most romantic interpretetion of all three. Ashkenazy is also doing a good job- takes 2nd prize. Richter misunderstood something in this music - that`s not a Hanon exersise - does not get to the final stage (for my taste).
I know what you mean with regard to Richter. However, if one listens to Rachmaninoff's own records, it become's clear that Richter plays very much like Rachmaninoff. Both have non-romantic style with an accent on clarity.
YouTube - Rupert Egerton-Smith plays Rachmaninoff Preludes
RES stacks up very well in comparison to all other performances of this piece on YT.
Lugansky may be the most extraordinarily powerful and brilliantly, but frankly RES plays more beautifully than any of these. The dynamic shadings in each group of rapidly flowing notes in his video are as stunning as they are sensitive.
Ashkenazy and Richter are such good players, but I sense little HEART in their work.
Three excelent performances. The best technical recording for me is the Cliburn´s. I agree with jhoward1957 idea; I imagine the whirling wind on a stormy night too and Cliburn is closed to that idea. He plays the sixteen notes with the right amount of pedal, creating a windy atmosphere and standing out the low and high notes. Good balance between hands. I have in my mind for comparison the last movement of second Chopin Sonate.
All three performances of this Prelude are unique expressions of the artist's physical, emotion and spiritual makeup. Richter's is powerful, profound and sensitive in the right places. Van Cliburn's performance is very beautiful, lithe, spontaneous, poetic and natural and unaffected. It is also full of pathos. Ashkenazy flows very well. He makes a beautiful sound and there is clarity. however he can hold back a little on the speed in some places.
Cliburn is by far the best of the 3 period. Because he takes his time with the harmony and brings actual meaning to the peace. I have this exact recording of the peace and I have been listening to it since I was about 8 and now I am 19. In my opinion there should not be any subjectivity among who the best is here and that is clearly Cliburn but I am not saying he is good at every piece he plays.
I favor Richter's interpretation the Opus 23, No. 7 prelude. This is one of my favorite works by Rachmaninoff. It's haunting, exquisite, exciting. I perform it at every opportunity.
This piece is so multidimentional its hard for me to say who I prefer most. Each pianist has command of a different section of it which draws the listener in. I call this piece the whirling wind on a stormy night. Like the wind its hard to capture.
That was wonderful, never heard that particular prelude before.
zachattack19942 1 month ago
Wow! A wonderful compendium, rigel48. Thanks for posting it.
GetMeThere1 3 months ago
Comment removed
narcissanmu 4 months ago
I wish this looped
xGRiiM 6 months ago
you guys obviously have no lives
llop990 11 months ago
"Punkmaninov!" ~ Elliot Smith
dogroses 1 year ago
Cliburn has the most imaginative approach. I like the way he brings out the left hand theme on the last page. He is also sensitive to Rachmaninoff's nostalgia.
piano345 1 year ago 6
I can play this with my feet.
thighmister 1 year ago 4
@thighmister Proof or it didn't happen
hugo12345811 1 year ago 3
@hugo12345811 Why would you just assume that I would be without my feet when I play this?
thighmister 1 year ago 6
@thighmister
AAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
Your comment made me laugh XD
Akhin 11 months ago
@thighmister YOU TOO ? Last time I did, I made my big toe bleed :(
Pheonix8900 4 months ago
Best Part 0:00-7:50
ioliano 1 year ago
a sublime piece performed by three excellent pianists, but I would really love to listen to Rachmaninoff himself playing this............ wish if I could.
theFirecat00 1 year ago
Ashkenazy is lyrically divine on this piece being neither overbearing nor feeble, so , in my opinion this is the very best performance of this piece on youtube, both technically and emotionally. Crisp, effervescent, manly.
mylovelylittleone 1 year ago
Van Cliburn... A love it, I want to cry...
Pianidlo 1 year ago
...u definitely need to survive this piece... 7 min of agony...beautiful...
bravche 1 year ago
...u definitely need to survive this piece... 7 min of agony...beautiful...
bravche 1 year ago
I adored all but liked Van Cliburn's marginally the best. Absolutely incredible. He is doing so many different things. Each artist expresses his own communication with the work and each is interesting, so a bit silly to compare however. I played this work about 12 years ago.
juliancochran 1 year ago 2
I like Van Cliburn's the best... because right at 4:08 that deep bass note sounds soooo good! Plus he seems to bring out the harmonic structure of the left hand very carefully.
ReturnOfTheStienway 1 year ago 2
That bass note is marked piano, and the one before which he plays louder is marked mf. If you wanna hear a stunning rendityion of this piece, listen to Lugansky play it (Verbier festival recording is best)
etudepatetico 1 year ago
@etudepatetico That's why I like the way he plays it... completely unexpected
ReturnOfTheStienway 1 year ago
@ReturnOfTheStienway u meen 4.04 ? ha
handycappo 1 year ago
@handycappo I guess more at 4:10 ...
ReturnOfTheStienway 1 year ago
@ReturnOfTheStienway i didnt mean to sound like a buzz kill, bein moany about a time.. those dramatic bass notes are the ones that give me goose bumps anyway so i know what u mean
handycappo 1 year ago
ashkenazy's is closest to how rachmaninoff played it.
ibclappin 1 year ago 2
this is such a great posting.
ibclappin 1 year ago 3
To me Richter's playing of this prelude is in a class by itself -- wild, on the edge, even a little dangerous; without a trace of sentimentality (just like Rachmaninoff himself, as someone pointed out). He unfolds a sweeping musical line from beginning to end -- brilliant, powerful. The others are ok, but sound to me somewhat timid, sentimental, and disjointed by comparison.
muellerpiano 1 year ago 6
@muellerpiano I entirely agree - there is something almost magical about his interpretation - as though he is privy to some deep dark diabolical secret that only he can reveal and expose and thus elevate our consciousness through his unique insight.
shishirth 1 year ago
For the listener, it's all about personal tastes. No two people hear the same thing. It's personal likes and dislikes. Unless the composition is butchered, interpretation is in the listeners's ear. From the musician's standpoint, it's all about motor function. No two pianists have the same motor function. It gets to a point where there can be no further enhancement of motor function. The best are those who can push them furthest. All of these pianists mentioned have mastered their motor skills.
lamontlewis 2 years ago 3
@scout6686: yeh bro, thats wat its all about!
001account 2 years ago
SOOOO SICCCKKK!! get woman if you can play that.
scout6686 2 years ago 24
@scout6686 I can play this
hohohee1 1 year ago
@hohohee1 yet no women? what happened?
ibclappin 1 year ago
@ibclappin i am a woman you fuck
hohohee1 1 year ago
@hohohee1 well you're obviously a very honorable one
ibclappin 1 year ago
@scout6686 If Richter is playing this, then the one who castigates will surely rot in hell
tedbohne 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@scout6686 an if you are a girl and play that, what u will have?
narcissanmu 4 months ago
Richter had a way with Rachman this is the high road.VanCliburn is more than wonderful here &less romantic ( i was surprised it was him)not unlike RACH playing he left hundreds of recs so we do know indeed.Gavrilov would have been a good incl here.Kocsis too is str n da concerti.Geiseking believe it was da first rec of #3! I wanna hear his Rach.
lovesGenet 2 years ago
Cliburn is amazing to me, it is the most romantic interpretetion of all three. Ashkenazy is also doing a good job- takes 2nd prize. Richter misunderstood something in this music - that`s not a Hanon exersise - does not get to the final stage (for my taste).
zartsekel 2 years ago 2
I know what you mean with regard to Richter. However, if one listens to Rachmaninoff's own records, it become's clear that Richter plays very much like Rachmaninoff. Both have non-romantic style with an accent on clarity.
flippert0 2 years ago
All three are well worth hearing. Van is the man.
Troybeallad 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
that was so lame
mdoub 2 years ago
Please Google
YouTube - Rupert Egerton-Smith plays Rachmaninoff Preludes
RES stacks up very well in comparison to all other performances of this piece on YT.
Lugansky may be the most extraordinarily powerful and brilliantly, but frankly RES plays more beautifully than any of these. The dynamic shadings in each group of rapidly flowing notes in his video are as stunning as they are sensitive.
Ashkenazy and Richter are such good players, but I sense little HEART in their work.
Pischnaholic 2 years ago
The most Rachmaninoffish interpretation is Richter. Ashkenazy plays it technically perfect! Van Cliburn is too delicate for Rachmaninoff.
ElPopularVale 2 years ago
What to say- P-E-R-F-E-C-T-!-!-!
marusiona 2 years ago 2
Three excelent performances. The best technical recording for me is the Cliburn´s. I agree with jhoward1957 idea; I imagine the whirling wind on a stormy night too and Cliburn is closed to that idea. He plays the sixteen notes with the right amount of pedal, creating a windy atmosphere and standing out the low and high notes. Good balance between hands. I have in my mind for comparison the last movement of second Chopin Sonate.
sotocarlosf 2 years ago 2
I think the best recording is by Alexis Weissenberg (RCA Victor Gold Seal). But that's just my opinion...
ChicagoTheory 2 years ago
Bilinska's recording is pretty impressive, too...
ChicagoTheory 2 years ago
No, it's not just your opinion, it's the truth.
diademverb 2 years ago
thank you for this :)
AnnMarry19 2 years ago 3
All three performances of this Prelude are unique expressions of the artist's physical, emotion and spiritual makeup. Richter's is powerful, profound and sensitive in the right places. Van Cliburn's performance is very beautiful, lithe, spontaneous, poetic and natural and unaffected. It is also full of pathos. Ashkenazy flows very well. He makes a beautiful sound and there is clarity. however he can hold back a little on the speed in some places.
concerto35 2 years ago 3
god.. please tell me..
why this song's so hard to play T_T
Zealloiene 2 years ago
because its not a song... hehe
adiemantus 2 years ago 14
This has been flagged as spam show
I ARE CUTE KITTEN......!
osocali 2 years ago
this is really amazing , Van Cliburn is my favorite, love his sensibility , but the others are great as well !)
nocturne163 3 years ago 5
Cliburn is by far the best of the 3 period. Because he takes his time with the harmony and brings actual meaning to the peace. I have this exact recording of the peace and I have been listening to it since I was about 8 and now I am 19. In my opinion there should not be any subjectivity among who the best is here and that is clearly Cliburn but I am not saying he is good at every piece he plays.
Goldfish9125 3 years ago 2
I give Cliburn's interpretation the nod for being the more surprising, sensitive, restrained, and warm of the three.
veege04 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ashkenazy sucks (sorry to say!).
weikko79 3 years ago
I favor Richter's interpretation the Opus 23, No. 7 prelude. This is one of my favorite works by Rachmaninoff. It's haunting, exquisite, exciting. I perform it at every opportunity.
MCarey0608 3 years ago
Thank you, thank you, thank you, for posting the masters.
tinyctlo 3 years ago 3
Richter's wind is a restless turbulence of torrid evocation.Van Cliburn's is a restive and subtly ominous with elegant lyricism.
Ashkenazy's is vapid whirling beyond reproach in vain.
ClassicalMusicReview 3 years ago
Impossible to beat Cliburn on this piece.
remline 3 years ago 5
Plase listen to Nikolai Lugansky's interpretation of this prelude here on youtube
jhoward1957 3 years ago 8
yes it's the best!!
shaermy 3 years ago
yeah man, lugansky play it perfect
capetond 3 years ago
Agreed - Lugansky wins as he combines power, brilliance and sustained melodic lines.
lamorlayefrance 3 years ago
This piece is so multidimentional its hard for me to say who I prefer most. Each pianist has command of a different section of it which draws the listener in. I call this piece the whirling wind on a stormy night. Like the wind its hard to capture.
jhoward1957 3 years ago 3
A Marvelous comment.
ClassicalMusicReview 3 years ago
i adore cliburns version, hes great
LoraineElizaSouza 3 years ago 4