Dinu Lipatti - Bach Chorale Prelude BWV 659 (Audio)

[achoacho46]

33 age what he gone like after 10 years

[achoacho46]

you are the best then eliso virsaladze

[93victord]

the greatest pianist that ever lived, there is no objection about that. he died an hour after playing a chopin nocturne at 33 year of age

[piano4tulom]

@93victord

yes, (sigh) beautiful playing he is very missed, beautiful perfect rendition of this bach/busoni choral prelude, thank you for sharing this sentiment.

[caprifoglioirlandese]

uno dei piu' grandi pianisti in assoluto,morto troppo presto

[gbhax121]

I played this at my senior year talent show.. didnt even place =/... I think I was beat by a garage band doing "teen spirit".  I'm not saying I was perfect but I did very well.

[sandfordofengland]

Beautiful music - naff recording - good (piano) performance - get over it.

[coppurt]

As a classical music illiterate I have to say this discussion about whomever is playing idiotic.

[saltburner2]

I adore Lipatti, and consider his First Partita the finest ever performance of that work.

But I'm bound to say that - compared to Horowitz - he does sound rather pedestrian in this piece.

[vernymax]

wwwwwwwooooooooooooooooooooooo­oooooooooooooooooooooooT.

[minasgekos]

oh yes this is good

[fdfdfdfdsss]

@organman52 You're a nobody.

[glassbull]

I smell virgins.

[MusicPredominates]

@glassbull : Rurly ?

[embenadorfinearts]

When Busoni did the transcription in a "grandiose way" like Liszt & others they made these in order to diffuse music of composers. They could be easily interpreted in salons with few instruments instead of an orchestra & were "the records" of that era. Bach was popular not until the beginning of the 20th century & it was the only possibility to hear his compositions. This apart, Lipatti interpretation re-crate the intimate climate from the original intent but this is the only exception !

[pflying]

Great pianist, but I stay with my preference for Horowits version of this piece on a Welte-Mignon piano. Search for it on this site...

[exanovaa]

omg this is not piano, this is MIDI file, if you play with a piano, USE IT ! Bach's music is'nt computer music...

[Arch5280]

I would have liked the rhythm to be just a bit more elastic, which is probably what most of the others are saying, too. The rhetoric of organ music is most powerfully conveyed with rhythm. Lipatti is focusing on the beauty of the melodic line, rather than the emotions that lie behind the hymn. But this work is more about drama than about lyricism.

[dier190]

I like what you say just your conclusion seems to me a bit odd. Why would a hymn be more a drama than lyricism? And isn't hymn a classical form of expression looking for the perfection in form, i.e. melodic line. Likewise isn't Bach also obsessed with a musical form whereby the emotions are powerful but primitive, not necessarily needing much refining in interpretation?

[Arch5280]

Just briefly: I feel it is about longing. Music makes even sorrow and longing beautiful, but it seems ---to me, of course, and your mileage will obviously vary--- as if other pianists represented here have managed to convey the longing more effectively.

[dier190]

once again, what I find remarkable at your comments is that you seem to KNOW what is all about (hymn, perfection of line, etc. ), description which in my ignorance I find brilliant; just you seem to despise it!!! Emotions should be amplified where there is doubt about them. Here, the blurry thing is exactly what you said so well, the strict form, the perfect form. By the lack of wine, romanticism, etc. this music is like a definition for sorrow, it is the DIVINE sorrow.

[Arch5280]

Haha! Good one. You go, Heilander...

[AGAG789]

Well, now this is the shit in every posible sense

[3NUNS]

@49josephgm : There is ! Read your bible and believe !

[camaysar222]

By the way, I grew up on Dinu Lipatti recordings, and remember loving everything. I gave this performance another listen and soon reacclimated myself to Lipatti's world. This is not too austere, it is perfect. Maybe I've been listening to too many inferior performances recently! :)

[HauntingPoet]

@camaysar222 Perfection itself is imperfection. So you are wrong it is not perfect in the real world :P

[camaysar222]

Mozart, Bach, and Beethoven were, like Chopin, all great improvisers. Can you categorically state that these men never altered even one note from one performance to another? Of course not! Yet that's what you seem to be doing, based only on your own bias. Mozart even left room for improvised playing in at least one concerto. Unless you channeled these men and spoke with them, you cannot know. I would guess, given the concept of "taste" in the 18th century, that they did play variants.

[sevieht]

@camaysar222

as Oscar Wilde said,

"Consistency, is the last refuge of the unimaginative"

:)

[androgynae]

I just appreciate all of the beautiful sounds left in the universe for time immemorial and for all to enjoy. I wish we took up less time to discuss and just listened to the gift that was left for us no matter WHO is interpreting....that is the beauty of it to me...

[davus0]

wilhelm kempff transcribed a whole book of bach chorales which, aside from being majestic works of art, are great fun to practice pedaling with an organ in mind.

[3NUNS]

The chorale behind this piece is Nun Komm ... now come the Saviour of Gentiles ...

[iguarni]

Unfortunately Dinu died very young.

But piano lovers could never forget him. We were in front of an absolute genius of piano's history for sure!!!!!!!

[frederickfrederikfre]

Condivido

[anonymusum]

There seem to be iconic musicians who cannot be criticised even a little bit. Callas, Horowitz, Bernstein, Karajan, Stokowski etc. are among them. All of them were great musicians (except Stokowski of course......) but not in every aspect and not in that absolute way the media and the record companies wanted the people to look at them. So this circumstance makes every discussion between a musician and a music lover a hard one. It´s a sort of useless undertaking - especially on Youtube.

[organman52]

Right on, anonymusum. You speak words of pure wisdom.

[3NUNS]

wot was wong wiff Stokowski ?

[anonymusum]

Hard to explain in a few words. Take the famous Bach Toccata in d-minor for example. Then listen to a good organ player and then to Stokovsky´s version. He left all inner musical aspects out and made a greasy, romantic-like orchestra piece out of it. It´s just a joke. He was a typical Hollywood conductor. Probably a good musician, but not THE Stokovsky as many Amercans remember him.

[3NUNS]

Yes. That is an apt observation.

[camaysar222]

Brings to mind the comment made by Godowsky after a Paderewski recital: "He plays well, but he's no Paderewski." As for Dinu, he's a wonderful pianist, but this performance is a notch too austere for my taste. (Excuse me while I duck under the table)

[jcracker]

smug pretentious douche alert

[trevorheywood]

Wasn't it the venerable Mr Stokowski who managed to conduct the premiere of Schoenberg's Violin Concerto? That was a feat in itself. Hats off to Stokowski!

[organman52]

You folks should go and listen to the horowitz youtube of this same masterpiece - mutilated beyond recognition. Good grief! Dinu Lipatti=knowledge. vladimir horowitz=pretentiousness.

[organman52]

Ah such beautiful lyricism. This piece couldn't sound more beautiful, even on its 'native' medium.

[dwrenched]

The combination of Bach and Lipaati, who died so tragically young, is truly mesmerising.

[mokacode]

I never fail to be amazed about way so arrogant and conceited some so called specialists are in their comments on some or other rendition.Don't ever venture to disagree!....Insults might be your reward.Can they ever play any instrument???.......

[jcracker]

@mokacode classical music snobs who've never touched an instrument in their life, god they piss me off

[mokacode]

@jcracker Ohhhhhh yesssss...... you briefly said what I really mean....LOL

[mradipatti]

what this interpreter does to me is heara prayer from soembody to God, Jesus Christ, completely untainted by this later Roman and Lutheran etc etc business.

the plague and black death were fresh or around the corner

[eameece]

He also does a great version of Jesu Joy.

[TobiTadeo]

Apart from this debate.

Wonderfully played. The permanently layers in this playing. Incredible.

[davidgray2]

I have done plenty studying, thank you very much. And I have the utmost respect for the organ, given that I used to be and orgsanist, before I decided to turn to the piano. And I apologise for my ambiguous comment; yes, there certainly is some trash out there that only an idiot with no standards could enjoy, but Horowitz certainly is not among that category! What I really meant, is that just because our friend hates Horowitz, does not mean his interpretation is definitely rubbish.

[jcracker]

jesus, this is the gayest argument i've ever seen

[soami2u]

Frankly I find this debate, lasting several pages here, silly and a waste of time. I have always seen Bach as ABSOLUTE MUSIC...its greatness transcends any one instrument. Lipatti brings so much beauty and spirituality to this performance...that's all I can say.

[junglejim66]

Bach can be played by a variety of instruments and in different genres, transcribed many ways, BUT it remains Bach.

To me it shows the universality of Bach; Perhaps the composer who was the foundation of much music today.

Bach has something for everbody.

[filiusrubonus]

There are only 3 really great composers for all times - their names start all with "B" - Bach, Beethoven, Beatles - and Bach was/is the greatest! (by Leonard Bernstein)

[organman52]

In case you think I said anything negative about the great Lipatti, you are mistaken. My criticism was of the performance by horowitz - HE took the transcription and mutilated the piece beyond recognition. Mr. Lipatti was a phenomenal musician and played the transcription as if it was the original organ piece.

[thejugglenaut91]

fyi, bach himself transcribed many pieces from his work himself. For instance bwv 1000 is his transcription for the lute from the VIOLIN! Who's to say what instrument can play what?

[organman52]

Thanks for the info. And he also transcribed - thereby improving - works of others as well. But you are missing my point - this whole discussion started because the 'great' vladimir horowitz plays the chorale prelude like it was a Rachmaninov prelude. The original Bach piece is utterly obscured. Now why don't you comment on THAT, instead of trying to teach me about a composer that I have studied for 50 years, written about [published], and been in complete awe of?

[davidgray2]

Look, it was on a piano. It's not the original organ piece anymore when it's on the piano; get over it. Horowitz's version is the most touching to me. Lipatti is wonderful too, of course. But you organists really have to get over yourselves, and stop all this "so and so has mutilated and desicrated our sacred Bach". Life's to damn short. Music is music and with every interpretation of anything, there's always someone who enjoys it, and that makes it worth while.

[organman52]

Thank you so much for the lecture. For your information, I am a musician. The fact that I play the organ is secondary. As for there always being someone to enjoy it - such individuals operate on very low - or no - standards. Perhaps you are one of them. In my view, not everything is beautiful, and by no means, is everyone's 'interpretation' valid. Do some studying before your next lecture.

[acer4me]

organma52 is a conceited bigot, who talks nonsense about Busoni. It is quite pointless trying inform a closed mind.

Orgnaman52 should be put in his place, that is, if he had any.

[organman52]

Whatever you say.

[aisrmc]

I am amazed at your patience with these people. I wholeheartedly agree with you: just because certain famous musicians decide to use Bach's glorious compositions as a vehicle for their indulgent egos doesn't mean that we should applaud their popularity. However, they were a product of their era and didn't think like we do. Liszt and Rachmaninoff can't be brushed aside because of their transcriptions either.

[organman52]

Yes - they were a product of their era, and I suppose - in their narrow minds - they felt justified doing whatever they wished to do. This 'transcription' serves as a wonderful example of the point I am always trying to make - that the composer must have had an idea in mind as to how their own music should sound, thus eliminating the notion of 'interpretation' entirely. If we compare this wonderful rendition to that of Horowitz, my point is proven.

[aisrmc]

I think we more or less agree. I must confess Horowitz fascinates me, but there is no doubt in my mind that Lipatti or Richter are FAR superior musicians, who communicate to me much more honestly and touchingly. I respect and admire your stance!

[grexample]

organman52, perhaps it is your own mind that is narrow. Have you considered that composers themselves can have many ideas as to how their own music can sound, but not enough time in one lifetime to write them all down? Nor a convenient notation system to specify even a few variant interpretations? Once you accept that even Bach likely played his own music differently each time--with a living mind, not one of an archivist--you might not disparage even interpretations you personally dislike.

[organman52]

No I haven't considered it for the simple reason that it is not true. Do you honestly think that Mozart, for example, would conduct one of his symphonies, operas or concertos DIFFERENTLY from one performance to the next? If you do, then I have nothing else to say to you. Therefore, I have nothing else to say to you. Enjoy all your 'interpretations.'

[grexample]

Goldberg Variations. Gould (1955) Gould (1981) Feltsman (1991). Who but the most narrow-minded among us can not see the value of viewing the same great masterpiece from such widely varying angles?

[anonymusum]

Yes - true. But Gould´s interpretations remained on the same field, in the same way of interpretation. The difference Lipatti - Horowitz is has nothing to do with that. I can understand organman52 completely - he is right. And why? He is a musician and you are obviously not (or a bad one....)

[organman52]

So true - the polyphony simply needs to progress forward. It doesn't need the whimsical distortions of an 'interpreter' for goodness sake.

[advisorC101]

Not the interpretor, the fool.

[camaysar222]

I am astonished that the musicians here are unaware of extant variant readings by great composers. Chopin, for example, even wrote variants into his pupils' music (Jane Stirling, Dubois-O'Meara to name two). Chopin is not alone in this well-attested practice. A bit too much emotion here and not enough dispassionate scholarship.

[ItzhakRoxMySox]

You are ignorant.

[organman52]

Thanks - I needed that.

[organman52]

If Horowitz's mutilation is 'the most touching' to you, then you are to be pitied. The man had NO IDEA what he was doing with this piece, nor the Schubert G flat major Impromptu, for example.

[davidgray2]

I can't even be bothered having a proper argument with someone as arrogant and self righteous as you, so I'm just going to call you an arsehole.

[organman52]

You call it arrogance and self-righteousness. I call it conviction and a refined ear.

[advisorC101]

That being the worst recording of the Schubert G-flat major Impromptu that I've ever heard. Its just so metallic and rigid...

Horowitz literally goes and alters the structure of the music because HE isn't satisfied with that composer's efforts and thus 'personalizes' it because he feels he can do it better. WRONG

[advisorC101]

Excuse me? Us organists have to "get over ourselves"?

Organists actually know what they are doing with Bach's music. As opposed to Horowitz who completely robs it of its natural beauty.

In any case this recording here is far better than anything VH could have 'come up' with.

"Its what's in the heart that counts. The heart of the music as well as the performer. But neither must be corrupted".

This wonderful man lets the notes speak for themselves.

[organman52]

Perfectly put, advisor - 'lets the notes speak for themselves - or perhaps - 'sing' for themselves'.

[advisorC101]

Singing.. would you make a choir sing a piece differently each time around?

[organman52]

HELL no.

[advisorC101]

Exactly.

[organman52]

What brain dead individual said this? LET ME AT THEM!

[advisorC101]

Who made the comment about the organists?

Scroll down and you will find them.

[organman52]

Clarification - by 'this' I was referring to 'us organists have to get over ourselves' ?

BRING IT ON, MOFO.

[vernymax]

@soami2u Arent all youtube "debates" silly and waste of time? yes

[egooidios]

obviously the whole debate is ridiculus!

I wish we hadn't had to suffer such eloquence over nothing

[aewanko300]

Another "historical informed performance" debate in here?

[Trepper1940]

Mr Lipatti is a great performer of Bach`s music; for instance, his version of the Partita number one is superb. He always stands by the spirit and nature of the music. On the other hand, Horowitz is not always a follower of the so called "urtext" and Iadmire this approach too. So gentlemen this debate is useless, it is simply a matter of preferences

[billabongxv]

trepper1940, you are absolutely right. I admire Lipatti very much, especially his Bach Partita, Mozart Sonata, Chopin Valses etc. I was only protesting undignified manner in which organman52 treats Horowitz's artistry all over Youtube.The man is obviously unbalanced and has a complex of inferiority, mania of grandeur and a fixation on Horowitz.

[billabongxv]

Sorry, gentlemen. I admire Lipatti, but his performance of this piece, compared to that of Vladimir Horowitz is inferior for a number of reasons.This is the performance of Busoni's arrangement, and D.Lipatti does not follow most of Busoni's performing instructions, resulting in rather bland, unpoetic and note-to -note performance. On the top of it, there is no tonal magic like in the Horowitz performance

[organman52]

WRONG. His performance is far superior to horowitz's for the simple reason that Mr. Lipatti is sensitive to the fact that this IS an organ piece, and is played throughout on ONE registration. Horowitz was stupid enough to follow all the ridiculous markings by busoni - a mediocre composer, and as such, an avid transcriber.

There are very few people left in this world who HONOR the composer. But why should that concern any of you? You live in a fantasy world.

[billabongxv]

I am sorry but YOU are wrong on many accounts here.

1.This is not an organ piece. This is a piano piece. Msrs.Lipatti and Horowitz play piano and not organ.

2.Bach DID leave many dynamic marks in his works (for example, French Overture, Italian Concerto etc.)

3. Bach had a habit of arranging the same piece for different instruments or solo group and did NOT expect the material to be treated in the same manner

(for example, Prelude from Violin Sonata in E)

[organman52]

As is usually the case with youtube know-it-alls, this IS an organ piece. It was TRANSCRIBED for the piano. There is nothing wrong with a transcription unless the original is distorted - which it IS by horowitz and not by Lipatti. For your information, I was a college professor for 32 years, but that isn't going to matter to you. In fact, you'll probably say that you pity my students. In fact, more than 200 of my former students are still in touch with me after decades.

[billabongxv]

Organman, I repeat the obvious. Horowitz and Lipatti did not record the organ piece. They recorded the transcription,done by Busoni. Of the two, Horowitz is the one who follows Busoni's performing instructions down to the smallest details, and Lipatti is the one who does not.

[organman52]

Busoni is wrong. Horowitz is wrong. And most of all, YOU are wrong. The only 'version' of this piece that interests me is the original chorale prelude for organ. If it must be transcribed, then leave it the hell alone as much as possible. And for your information, organists know what 'volume' to play - it is implicit in the structure and content of the music. But you wouldn't know a thing about those issues, now would you ?

[billabongxv]

Let me be patient and explain a few things to you, like to a 3-year old child.

When you take a Rembrandt painting, and you paint something over, you are damaging or destroying the original. When you make a transcription of a piece of music, there is no such damage- the original is still there for everyone to see.

Why are you so stupid not to understand this? Your complaining about Busoni makes absolutely no sense.

[organman52]

Your idols, mr. busoni and mr. horowitz, have done EXACTLY what you are saying would damage the original. Do you have any idea what the Bach piece sounds like? If you did, you would never endorse the mutilation that seems to be the center of your existence. If Bach heard the transcription that you so adore, he would probably be outraged. And before I sign off, tell me ONE structural, organizational, or contextual thing about the piece. Just ONE. Only then might this 'discussion' continue.

[cristinelu13]

It's obvious Busoni didn't harm the original piece by making a transcription in a more romantic style. Artists are free to make any transcriptions they want. From the start this cannot be a historical interpretation, since it's played on a piano, so i don't see why other historical aspects would matter.

[organman52]

You're right - he didn't harm the piece. He merely disfigured it beyond recognition. With all the music out there, I can't stop wondering why individuals decide to transcribe for their own instrument. I realize that the masters sometimes made transcriptions of their own or others' works - but they are masters, not hacks lack ferrucio busoni, non-composer.

[RabidCh]

Busoni was not only a master pianist but a composer as well, unless you want to insult Busoni on his original compositions as well.

[thejugglenaut91]

god, i'm really sorry for you that you are so ignorant and narrowminded about the scope of music. It matters not what instrument you play it on, it's still music! I think you're just jealous!

[organman52]

I SO appreciate your sympathy. THANK YOU! And it is your right to believe that I am jealous. In fact, keep thinking that if it will make you feel better. But you don't know what you're talking about.

[Scott1916]

@organman52 Busoni died in the early 1920's--we know his name, he is respected by musicians today--will we know your name 80 years from now, will it be respected? Who is the hack--jeez, grow up you loser!

[organman52]

What the hell does my name have to do with this discussion?

[88alan8800]

@organman52 Bach was a big fan of transcribing actually, do you not know of the numerous concertos by vivaldi, marcello, etc that bach transcribed for the harpsichord? theyre on IMSLP if you dont believe me. Bach wrote his music for god, not to make himself look good in the eyes of others. I dont think a man as selfless and humble and GREAT as bach would be outraged that someone in our day and age has carried on the tradition of transcribing.

[herodot2]

@organman52

What on earth makes you think Bach would be outraged when hearing the transriptions? He transcribed his own pieces left and right and back and forth. From hapsichord to organ, violin, oboe, chorus and back.

The obsession with pseudo-"orignality" is exactly that: an obsession, at most 30 years old, and contrarian in spirit to hundreds of years of classical music before that.

[organman52]

@herodot2 Transcriptions are one thing. Mutilation of a masterpiece is another. If you don't know the difference, then what is the point of this 'discussion?'

[herodot2]

@organman52

Seems you are so afraid of discussion that you preemptively choke it.

Both Busoni and Liszt called their Bach transcriptions transcriptions, and this is the term under which they have entered the literature.

But the musical word has only been waiting for you to put this right, of course...

[FriendlyCroock]

@organman52 man i hate people like you

[organman52]

@FriendlyCroock In other words, you HATE integrity, knowledge, insight and confidence. Johannes Brahms said the following "Those who enjoy their own emotionally bad health and who habitually fill their own minds with the rank poisons of suspicion, jealousy and hatred, as a rule take umbrage at those who refuse to do likewise, and they find a perverted relief in trying to denigrate them." I believe this applies DIRECTLY to you.

[FriendlyCroock]

@organman52

lol stay calm

you really need to grab yourself some filings you freakin robot Bach was a romantic person living in a difficult era not being aloud by church leaders to do emotional interpretations like this

Listening to Koopman's interpretations of Bach`s music is like listening to a helicopter

[organman52]

@FriendlyCroock I never once said anything negative about Maestro Lipatti's performance of this. My criticisms were of the 'transcription' itself and of vladimir horrorwitz's mutilation of it. Do your homework before you spew your non-facts.

[pyroprince78]

@organman52 by 'mutilation' you mean to say that he takes too many liberties in a rather self-indulgent fashion? whereas lipatti maintains the integrity of the chorale (as much as this is possible, given the pianistic bastardization a.k.a. transcription). If that's what you're saying, I guess I agree with you.

Lipatti teaches me something here about form, structure, trajectory, balance. Horowitz goes beyond. He moves, touches, and transports me out of my own skin.

[emanonami]

@organman52 Bach is dead. For better or worse, this version exists. Grow up and deal with it with some maturity.

[organman52]

@emanonami Are you illiterate, or just plain stupid. I never - repeat never - said anything derogative about the 'transcription.' And I praised Master Lipatti's playing of it - and everything else he played in his short life. Stop putting words in other people's mouths, you dummy.

[organman52]

@emanonami Are you illiterate, or just plain stupid. I never - repeat never - said anything derogative about the 'transcription.' And I praised Master Lipatti's playing of it - and everything else he played in his short life. Stop putting words in other people's mouths, you dummy. And for your information, ANY musician can 'transcribe' an organ piece to the piano. It doesn't take much either - it is simply a matter of transferring the notes from one medium to another. Get it?

[Sandemose]

I think its wrong to say someones "wrong" because like a version better than any others. I think you are wrong.

[organman52]

And Bach did write dynamics and tempo markings, but only occasionally. In my recent article for a national music magazine, I go into great detail about this. But that, too, isn't going to matter to you. In fact, you have no reason to believe anything I say. That is your choice, and the choice of all you wannabees that proliferate youtube with your suppositions. As far as what is idiomatic for instruments, I have also published numerous articles on the subject. But you won't believe that either.

[billabongxv]

Bach wrote dynamics only occasionally because he did not reckon with ignorance such as yours. According to you, since he wrote it only several times, it seems that all the rest - over a thousand works by Bach have to be performed without dynamics at all! Is this the wisdom you are teaching to your poor students?

[billabongxv]

4.Bach used characteristic of particular instruments to the advantage of music, which is evident from his re-working passagework in his Violin Concerto and his Harpsichord Concerto (two different versions of the same piece) to better match the instrument. It is obvious that he would have used the characteristics of modern pianoforte too, despite the fact that he wasn't satisfied with early Silbermann's efforts.

[billabongxv]

5.The fact that any piece is written for organ does NOT mean that it has to be played in a dull, uniform rhythmical manner. Bach was not a dull ,unpoetic composer and he used both tempo fluctuations and rubato in the Baroque sense . Read his son's C.P.E. Bach's "Versuch...." about this.

I could write a book about how wrong you are in your " musical" judgements (which only reveal an amazing lack of historical and aesthetical knowledge) but this should be enough

[organman52]

Oh please - start writing ! I can't wait to see a large amount of nonsense all in one place. And I hasten to add that, as an organist for my entire life, I couldn't agree with you more that Bach is not dull. But my consummate knowledge of musical structure serves as my guide to explore the evidence deeply and systematically - something which you probably know nothing about, but wish that you did. Then you wouldn't be so ill-informed about almost everything.

[billabongxv]

Dear organman, the largest amount of nonsense is situated right between your ears. Either you are not serious and are writing just to piss people off, or you are really uneducated. You seem not to have knowledge of music and probably you can't play any instrument.That is why you are summarily dismissing any serious argument.You will never post anything of yours, because you know people would laugh, and the process of uploading videos(as you said rightly) is too taxing for your mental capacity

[organman52]

'Dear'? Oh please. If you only knew what my credentials are. Even if I divulged that information, you wouldn't believe it. So let me END this exchange by saying simply that 1] you have no idea what you are talking about regarding what I know and what I can do, and 2] YOU are the one who hasn't discussed a SINGLE issue rationally - all you do is rebel against an unpopular viewpoint. You must know less than nothing about this great music in order to spew the crap you do. Have a great life.

[billabongxv]

Ha...why don't you post your real name then, so that we all may be in a "shock and awe"? WOW! I will publicly engage your views if you do. But you won't dare to do it

[organman52]

For two reasons and two reasons only - it's none of your business and it's none of your business.

One of the trademarks of a pedantic robot is the urgency of knowing 'who it is'. Anonymity just doesn't cut it for the mediocre and the superficial 'followers' of 'classical' music.

We will never agree on anything until I know who YOU are in terms of your knowledge of these critical, indispensable aspects of the great musical literature.

[billabongxv]

HAHAHAHAHA what urgency? We are corresponding for some days, you are the one who is bragging about yourself all the time " if only you would know who I am", and finally when I asked you to disclose your identity, then you chickened out and said that I felt the "urgency". You mentioned your identity 6 times and I asked you only once about it.

[billabongxv]

If you are only interested in listening the organ version, then please do! And leave Busoni, Horowitz, Lipatti and others in peace.

[organman52]

Here's a cordial invitation for you to ponder - go back to wherever you came from and stop spewing garbage. YOU are the one who insists on knowing 'who I am'. YOU are the one who assumes whatever makes you feel better. YOU are the one who keeps repeating himself. As for leaving the perpetrators alone - no can do. I will be exposing fraud until the day I die - which I'm sure you hope is immediate.

[billabongxv]

I don't want you to die and I would never wish such a thing. Not only that, but I would never wish anything bad happens to you.

[billabongxv]

Now, about myself...I do not bow before famous performers. There is a large number of VERY famous performers,especially from the 2nd half of XX century of whose artistry I have no use, unfortunately, and who shall remain nameless here. But I do enjoy the artistry of Horowitz, Lipatti and many others, and they can give me a real joy

[organman52]

A master musician. His gorgeous performance of this transcription makes Horowitz's look even more ridiculous.

[billabongxv]

And you organman52 should stop spilling your mental garbage around, without any substantiation. I challenge you to check the score and see who is faithful to the original. You are talking about things you did not study. Lipatti and Horowitz did not play the organ but piano, and they both played Busoni's arrangement

[organman52]

The ORIGINAL, as you put it, is by BACH and it is for the organ. Any pianist who is a musician would know that and honor that. Bach did not write dynamics all over his music, and especially did not write all the nonsensical rubato that your friend horowitz ruins the piece with. People like you have no place in a truly MUSICAL discussion. You only care about famous performers and don't give a crap about the composer.

[thejameslloydproject]

(concluded)

I believe there were persons in attendance at that Besancon concert whose hope for the future was given by Lipatti what no Marshall Plan could.

[thejameslloydproject]

(continued)

I will own that I see those times, especially 1910 to 1950, through a personal hagioscope, and confess to feeling trite in calling Lipatti a saint, but what else can I call this magnificent recording and the our knowledge of the story of the man whose music it plays, than a bona fide holy relic of an exalted human being who lived when such things were most needed?

[thejameslloydproject]

I think there was something about the Modern era (I'll say 1890-1960, for sake of reference) that brought out supernal efforts in the expressive arts.

The horrors and wonders of that time, the brilliant steps forward in the sciences and the barbaric about-faces in geopolitics, shaped a time when extremes prevailed.

[AnthonyBlunt]

This is one of the best recordings because there is no indulgent rubato.

[nairigrigorian]

uno de los más grandes Maestros!!!

gracias

[heritageElite]

Nice...am toata colectia cu el pe vynil...

nice combination:Dinu Lipatti & Florin Salam!

:))))))))))

[Gorowitz]

Is that thing on the piano a glass of water? He was a rather small man. You can se that on the photos with his wife. I was most surprised when i saw that. After listening to the Grieg concerto (Best recording ever if you ask me) I thought that he was a giant.

But he was instead naturally a giant in heart, soul and mind. Thatwas his secret,don't you think?

A blessed man. Dinu, you will always be remebered!

And thank you ciconius for letting us here this tale of live and death and truth!

[ciconius]

Of course Lipatti's recording is one of the best! Too bad there's no video....