I'm truly shocked by the number of wrong notes! Listen to 6.37 for example- it's a bloody mess of split octaves and missed notes. And throughout the whole piece the rubato is so extravagantly exaggerated, as was the custom at the time, that it seems laughablytrivial- there is no accumulation of weight. i love Rachmaninoff's music but this performance is shockingly bad- I've heard teenagers play this better.
i'd like to respond to that by saying that this passage has the same "kind of slip" as when Horowitz misses. It's not the result of sloppy playing as you alledge, but rather the payoff that is either rewarded or robbed of an artist when they take total interpretive risks. The soft chord at the end of the intro is worth the price of admission alone, and requires just as much skill to present. This is a very indepth and profoundly beautiful presentation, paced beautifully.
@paulybarr Your comment makes as much sense as saying the earth is flat. What is wrong with you? You also believe you were abducted by aliens who messed with your intellect? LOL
It would be nice to see people who know nothing of pianism, musicality and artistry desist from making such inane and idiotic comments such as yours! NOT on Rach's performances :-)
Although I do love Rachmaninoff and his style of playing, I personally feel that his way of playing this ballade is not very enjoyable to listen to. Sure, he's playing all the right notes, and his dynamics are correct for the most part, but there is something breathless about his interpretation overall. There are so many important pieces melodic expression that we simply do not get to hear because he is playing at break-neck speed. His technical brilliance swallows up the beauty of the piece.
I do not believe anyone has approached Rach in his interpretation of the 3rd ballade, Cliburn's is the only other one I can even stand, let alone listen to in its entirety! :-)
My two favorite composers ever!! Rachmaninoff & Chopin. How wonderful to have the one playing a piece by the other. Amazing!! Rachmaninoff can do no wrong in my book. He has always been a favorite & unfortunately I was not given a chance to play any of his music because only the "oldies" (Beethoven, Bach, Mozart, etc) were ever deemed "true classical". So sad. However, I was fortunate enough to be able to play some pieces by Chopin. Both are just the best!!
Devil to the hindmost, I'll play it to my liking with my giant hands and impossibly relentless inertia, take it or leave it. Get out of here, Pussies.
I was listening to this at the dead of night, and it fits the mood perfectly. there is something special about this one, it's just so free and full of contrast in the different parts. For an old recording and probably played by an older Rach, this is great.
why are people so retarded on youtube? bash rachmaninoff and say argerich is better? go suck dicks. no one has any say on who is better or whatnot. as rachmaninoff has said, anton rubinstein was the best pianist he has ever heard. and anton rubinstein has said, we are all infants compared to franz liszt. go suck it.
@gygatanz52 Sorry but you are way off! any listener who has the capacity to feel emotions can not help but love everything Rachmaninoff played! Rach is the god of piano!
Isn't it a strange paradox that modern jurors praise the rachmaninoffs and the hoffmans as the greatest pianists in history, yet are adamant on literal text intrepretations and safety over adventure and risk. Where would the human race be if we didn't take risks and venture to go to places we'd never been before...
If I didnt even know anything about piano and heard this without knwing who did it I probably would have at least guessed he was russian ;) it Really shows when you think about it, and this piece really isnt very russian though its interesting to hear him play it.
I can't help but feel that this recording would have been perfect if Rachmaninoff just hadn't insisted on playing with such jolting swiftness during some passages.
@SepiaLatimanus I agree, Rachmaninoff has recomposed this piece without changing a note. It makes you wonder whether Rachmanioff had ever heard anyone else play this piece. But he most likely did, but nonetheless gave it his own interpretation., which transforms it to a kind of subliminal exercise/. composer, .
Not that I don't like this version. I think it is very interesting and flavorful in its own way. Yet I really don't understand what Rachmaninoff is trying to do here. His version has much less legato phrasing than would be expected of something of Chopin's.
@FredilYupigo That's just evidence of how much performance practice has changed with time. To have this kind of historical evidence is a really privileged gift.
Rachamninoff's palying very interesting and personal in a good way, he truly has a clear idea he follow´s and manages to keep the ballade as one piece...well of course, he's rachmaninoff...I highly recommend Jorge Bolet's version of the third ballade, my favorite.
I like your conversation, but only one question: about the golden age, and all his interpreters, I would just like to know what you think about the theme of the emotions... I'm a little bit desesperate when I hear so many people playing piano with, at least for me, no idea about what´s the real sense of what we are suppose to do, or better, transmite: emotions. I try every day on my piano to find the way, this Way, and I fell all the time so sad to see the few interess for this Way...
Does anyone understand that we are listening to someone who is listed as one of the great composers? And does this not inspire anyone? When could you ever say that you could hear Chopin play Rachmanninoff if it were not an anachonism? I mean we are talking about someone with the mind of Rachmaninoff making this his own piece. Have you listened to all the voicings and subtle textures he applies? Music is supposed to be creative and fresh everytime its played. He did a great job of that.
Thank you for this gem! Not because the name of player is Rachmaninoff, but because almost noone can play like this anymore. If someone tried in competition, they will be gone in first round. But mostly, I love the titanic sound. I cannot hear this kind of sound from a single living pianist, no not one. I have never heard it. I think the last well-known pianist to have it was Gilels. With his death and later Horowitz's ended the golden age of piano I feel.
himitsunosallychan - you say, "If someone tried in competition, they will be gone in first round." Right on! And that's exactly what's wrong with much of contemporary classical music. Why could Rachmaninoff play like this? Because he was a composer himself. He encountered Chopin as a colleague. Today's "urtext" worship is largely a feeble substitute for musicians' lost creativity, a crutch for their insecurities, leading to the familiar sterility and conformism.
I could not agree with you more, 123mortimer456さん, the modern day music competition is nothing but a ridiculous curse.
To speak in extreme terms, everyone sounds the same, and that is why I almost never listen to today's competition musicians. They are boring and tiresome to listen to because I have heard them already even before I hear them.
And your views on "urtext" myth exactly coincides with mine, I must say!
You guys remind me of the old folks who claim that cars are not what they used to be: they were solid, made of steel not plastic, and you could repair one with a screwdriver, hahaha!
If you guys were younger, you would realize that classical music has today a vibrant community of followers who is more critical than ever (thanks to the Internet), and who is not willing to accept but the best from today's performers.
If I were younger, I would be disallowed from browsing the Internet. But even though I am my age, I still do realize that classical music has today a vibrant community of followers who are more critical than ever, as well as one of followers who are not so critical, willing to accept what (and only what) others say is the best.
I have no idea how I reminded you of an old folk who claims to have repaired a car with a screwdriver.
Remember what you wrote a month ago: "I cannot hear this kind of sound from a single living pianist, not one" and "with (Gilels) death and later Horowitz's ended the golden age of piano"
So you think the good days are gone, and pianists today are inferior. This contradicts your say about "today a vibrant community of followers who are more critical than ever", because pianists today would not be able to make a living. But they do, because many are excellent.
No no. I think the GOLDEN days are gone, not necessarily all the good days.
But, EVEN IF I thought as you say, I don't see how that could be a contradiction. Even the most critical listener has to settle for the not-so-good if the good are no longer around to criticize. Else, s/he would have to quit listening altogether. That's too boring.
This is precisely what people living their GOLDEN years think: that the GOLDEN days are gone.
And here is the contradiction: there is no reason for past pianists to have been better, the human genome has not changed. But unprecedented exposure to classical music has raised demand for high quality, therefore there is reason for having better pianists today.
There are enough good recordings from the past that today's pianists would not have a chance if they were worse.
Yes, I agree with you that there is reason for having better pianists today, one reason being the one you gave.
But, I am not talking from reason when I say I feel the golden days are gone. It is from listening to recordings and performances.
To my ears at least, Rachmaninoff is without question greater than any of the actively performing pianists I know. This is so clear to me that I feel almost silly saying so. (Argerich and Pollini in their young days were very very great. Sadly, not now.)
There is nothing silly in that, our taste is what matters, and it is beyond discussion. Fortunately there are many good recordings in the more expressive style of Rachmaninoff.
I also notice that often there is something special in the performance of a young artist that gets diminished over time. We recognize this in those who gain fame very early, a Kissin, Pogorelish, Yundi Li, and surely others who are on the verge of success right now and we will appreciate in the future.
Curiously, your second paragraph expresses what I have been thinking. I find it true also also of Midori (the violinist). The performances from her early career simply amaze me. Nowadays though, I am not so sure. Maybe something similar happened with Argerich and Pollini.
And (I hope you won't think I'm kidding, because I am not) Lang Lang, whose Rach#3 with Dutoit here on YouTube brings tears to my eyes, is for me the living champion of the expressive.
No, I don't think you are kidding. I had a similar experience with Lang Lang. I always thought of him as a clown, until I heard his interpretation of Mozart's sonata K 330 here on youtube. He plays it practically perfect, with none of the silliness one associates with him from the way he looks...
@123mortimer456 exactly, i totally agree with you. in today's culture, we place the composers on a shrine as "gods,", and the score as the "bible." we don't regard the score as an unfinished process, and are afraid to do anything creative. pollini is the best example.
From Rachmaninov who had the technique to play anything at any speed you find here his personal and highly musical take on Chopin. Long melodic lines are present and sing clearly while the other parts are played as orchestral support. Played as a Master chooses to do so.
I think that rachmaninov is plating this because the record company required it of him. It sounds like Rach didn't care much for this piece. This seems to be the playing of someone who is bored to tears with the composition that he is playing. Call me crazy..........
I think this is a rare recording, maybe interesting cuz is Rach's but I dont like it, I think Zimmerman's is best. Whatever, I prefer listening Rachmaninoff with his own masterpieces. Cheers.
It's funny to see some people get so very wound up about somebody else's comment: so what somebody thinks it's not that good. I myself think it's a great performance of a great musician, but I could understand why somebody else wouldn't like it or prefer another version. No use saying someone's "probably the most stupid person on earth" or something like that, I mean, come on..
Another thing that needs to be taken into account is that Rachmaninoff was a product of late 19th century Russian pianism. Chopin himself was viewed differently, as was Romanticism itself. Chopin and Rachmaninoff were only separated by about 1/2 century. Today we have a different perspective with Romanticism completely behind us - and a more studied view of the music of that time. We need to take A LOT into account when hearing these old masters; esp. Rach - one of the greatest of 20th c.
Why don't you learn from these people and try not to sound like the next concours-contestant who treats music like some people treat the bible. Be unique, and all that matters is that you can entertain an audience for several minutes!
I think some people here lack imagination, and a sense of their place in history. This is the performance of a great artist, who as you can hear stands well above the level of difficulty. This recording gives you an insight in how someone of great knowledge would do it. There are others, and they do it well too. (read next)
I believe that judging an interpretation like this one is awfully difficult, you have to take into account a hell lot of elements; but saying it can't be judged is too much, it means that even experts and excellent musicians are incapable of telling what has and what hasn't been done well. I can't judge it, I'm no expert, but I know that there's some good ways and some bad ways of doing things. I assure you all MY interpretation of this piece is awful for everyone who might care to judge it.
I think I get your point, I only want you to grant me that there are some things (maybe too few, but that in the end there ARE), that are almost equally judged by almost anyone. That's what I meant proposing my interpretation as subject of jusdgement, which would be, for anyone, a bad interpretation.
We have to be careful of extreme points of view, because you are canceling experience: in experience we DO think there are some good things and some bad things, and some others that will be good for anyone expert in that matter. If you're sick, you'll never give the same weigh to any guy's advise and the advise of a physician. You will go for the one you consider 'expert', that is, 'the best judge' in sickness matters. The same here, there are some that CAN judge better that some like you or me.
the problem is people tend to look at matters such as this and think of it in terms of "correctness." It's up to the individual to decide whether or not musical interpretation is acceptable.
j'adore rachmaninoff chacun sa performance et si ca deplait a certains...ils ont cas ecouter une autre version moi elle me parle musicalement et j'adhere a la musique rachmaninovienne ^^
Chacun interprete la musique comme il le veut merde ! :)
I disagree with this masterful performance's interpretation. Allegretto is NOT this fast. Also, one can't change the rhythm of a piece arbitrarily. Sure, Rachmaninoff is one of the greatest ever. But even he cannot push the tempo this quickly.
-Leodwm366: I'd say channeling the composer nowadays is now musically acceptable. Horowitizian interpretations are no longer the norm.
Please, superficial people, just listen and see that all of you are in front of one of the greatest musicians ever!!!! Try to full your emptiness with the master's message!
why did chopin bother writing dynamics or tempo markings? for them to be ignored so that osmeone else coulkd re-interpret them as they see fit. sorry, and i can't believe i'm goping to say this, but i think rachmanninov has gone too far and he has distorted this piece up to the point at which it ceases to be a ballade, it shuold be called "no. 3 according to rach." because it seriously bears no resemblance to how chopin wrote it. he should have marked it con molto rubato
To be honest I don't think Chopin would have had a problem with how Rachmaninoff plays this piece. Rach has a tremendous mind as a composer, and it's uniqueness is a good trait I think. Besides, I challenge you to listen to the top 20 recordings of this piece.You will notice that each one sounds almost like a different piece. So if this is going to far, what then are all the others? Anyway, I am sorry for your lack of musical education. Its a rampant plague these days.
not nearly as rampant a plague as bad manners, clearly. i spent ten months learning this piece as part of my final recital for my music degree and learned to play it exactly as indicated in chopin's urtext. I even apologised for positing an opinion which could be considered disrespectful. I have nothing but respect for Rach and do not disapprove of his endeavour. However, I feel that this particular performance bears very little resemblance to 'the original' and as such, I dislike it.
Well I also doubt Rach's interp. would be valid today if offered. different teachers may demand more or less adherence to the text. It's always helpful and a good idea to learn it with the exact printed note values first, then you know where to begin, at least. I would hope though that once you had learned the printed note values your teacher would allow for some liberties of interpretation? but perhaps not. Certainly there are also wrong ways of taking "liberties" with the rhythm.
however don't mistake my above comment to mean that Rachmaninoff's playing isn't absolutely fantastic. It just wouldn't be accepted from a student to differ so widely from the text, but this is due to the fact that there are few if any students today that have such a honed sense of pulse. Ironically, Rachmaninoff's departure from the "urtext" only makes the motives in the music stand out more, like high-def TV. Students have a tendency to arbitrarily obscure the rhythm with their rubato.
@Weimartoccata Lack of musical education? Or to much of it? Either way we have entered a absurd age that neglects musicality, for a artificial and abstract need for fidelity to a piece of paper.
How can anybody say this is too fast? You should just concentrate on the music and enjoy one of the best interpretations of the piece i have heard so far.
Rachmaninov played Chopin like no other pianist. He played with his own compositional insight, every phrase and dynamic was planned according to his own set of guidelines. Just because you'd disagree with his interpretation doesn't allow you to put it down. Here's a pianist/composer to spent hours and hours at his craft and played everything with artistic sensibility and impetus. When you hear Chopin playing like this, you know it's Rach. Listen to his playing of the Minute Waltz, do you like?
a message for 'professor' jbalni1:looks for me like you knew Chopin in person.I have been reading thousands books about Chopin,unfortunately I never heard nothing about you?!Must be mistake.
Let me tell you my dear-don't even try talk about music,as I believe my grade 1 pupil would give better explanation on this awesome interpretation.I really feel sorry for you darkness.
Talking about music in terms of right-wrong & similar categories produces all kind of delirious/hilarious results like those here. Comments refer to what exactly?? A comment on a verbal expression of the impression of X produced during the listening to the interpretation of a graphic-generic version written by Chopin to match his own inner accoustic images - played by Rachmaninov... What EXACTLY is right or distorted?
Interesting approach to Chopin and one not often followed nowadays. I those years people still went to concerts to hear something special in interpretation, excentric, almost hurried parts like these included. As Cortot admirer I'm used to this, but I understand why some people reject anything departing from what seems to be fixed completely by the score. But: the score is only the means, not the final goal and right or wrong in interpretation is much more difficult to define...
I agree that he plays (in my opinion) too fast on that moment. But the pianist is free to do that but it's just not my style. Remarkable that the part from 5:30 sounds more like a happy waltz:)
The inbalance of your stomach is of little importance to me, as is your perception that clearly is about either right or wrong notes, or about tempo. Try to understand a little bit more about the movement of music and then try again to say something sensible about performing. Because your premature comment is hardly worth replying...good luck in your musical development!
jbalni1, WHAT?! Should be much slower? According to who? Did your teacher tell you that? Was your teacher Chopin and did he tell you he would throw up at this tempo?
Rachmaninoff was known to have given very strange interpretations of many pieces. To our ears they're bound to sound even more strange. It's very interesting and delightful to listen to him, though i'm sure very few people would interpret the way he does.
He understands this ballade. We should't taking this piece too serios. This ballade has scherzos character and I like this accomplishment more than e.g. zimmerman playing :)
its rachmaninov playing!!! the only thing you're allowed to say is 1) fucking amazing, or 2) I dont understand, but never its no good cause you know shit all next to rachmaninov who is at a level of beethoven and mozart.
Beautiful. Only a few ppl can appreciate this. It is really his heart that is more important than all the "techniques of expression" that we are taught and pay attention too. This is awesome.
i was JUST reading something about this particular interpretation today . . . Rachmaninoff put MUCH intention behind this performance. He certainly knew what he was doing and I'm sure there is much we can learn from this if we extract his musical reasons and messages . . . remember this is Rachmaninoff playing Chopin.
Please, do not criticize a genius master like Rachmaninoff with idiotic comments. This is a legendary recording and a testimony of Rachmaninoff's interpretative genius. It is blessed with his incredible singing tone, eloquent phrasing and superb sense of organization. Don't say it's bad just because you don't agree with it or like some other recording more. Learn to appreciate different interpretations of a music piece. And no, you don't know how Chopin wanted this ballad to be played.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This is a gross distortion of Chopin's masterpiece. I guess because he's Rachmaninov, he can make the piece unrecognizable. Wrong. The rhythm is awful and the liberties are extreme. How dare ANYONE mutilate Chopin [or any master] like this? This is the worst playing of this piece ever recorded. It's butchery, plain and simple.
haha you touched a nerve... more like u need more nerves... so u can think out and sort it out within your brain that rachmaninoff is one of the greatest pianists ever... he's interpretation is to be followed.. it's absolute. n yeah.... idiot...
Yes he IS allowed to 'interpret' however he wants. But it is simply not the same piece Frederic Chopin wrote in 1842. It is distorted beyond recognition. If you don't hear that, you need some guidance in STYLE and STRUCTURE.
I know interpretation is a matter of opinion but I think Rachmaninoff's interpretation is faultless. I enjoyed this recording very much. Also i think rachmaninoffs style of playing would be much closer to chopin's than most modern performers...THere i said it lol
I'd wager that we wouldn't always agree with Chopin's performances of his own works. The style of playing would be even more different to our ears than this Rach recording. First, neither Chopin nor Rach would have played a piece the same way twice. Secondly, we are not used to variations in tempo that were documented to have been the norm in the 19th century. And third, there are some additional differences just because the instruments of Chopin's day were so different from ours.
mmmm =/ miren alguno de los que aquí hablaron expresa su preferencia por simerman, real es que el tiene mejor tecnica, pero más concreto el hecho se presenta al escuchar en rachmaninov una mejor repartición de espacioes conservando así el espíritu melancólico de mi ídolo Frederit Chopan.
As Rubinstein said, Rachmaninoff always turned everything into a Rachmaninoff, even a Chopin sounds like a Rachmaninoff, but it was so very convincing.
It is pretty stupid to say Rachmaninoff plays this badly or doesn't repect it. No one cared more about playing than Rachmaninoff. He was the first to get enraged if he felt his performance wasn't quite good enough. How he plays it is how he intended it, everything very deliberate. He just interpret music in his own way, he was a free spirit.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Funny. Weird. Even stupid. The composition is falling apart into sentimental bits and artistic pieces. These seem to be the two extremes Rachmaninoff was able to understand, with nothing in between.
you are quite possibly the stupidest human being on planet earth. i am so filled with rage that i am incapable of forming a response to your ridiculous statement. therefore all i have to say is fuck you.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The performance is a joke. Give me Rubinstein any day. I've heard that Russians are sloppy, but this is really the sloppiest ever. Listen to Rubinstein in his prime and you will see how Chopin should be played: with respect.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Right on, Jasonc001. Sloppy, distorted beyond recognition, erratic, just plain awful. It looks like pentium1000 disagrees with us, probably because her/his hearing is not functioning properly these days - or ever.
People like you are the reason why the average IQ of America is so low. "Sentimental bits" and "artistic pieces" seem to be the two extremes YOU are able to understand, with nothing in between. I feel sorry for you, an elephant must have stepped on your ear. Please do the world a favor: cut your balls off so you cannot contaminate the rest of the world.
This interpretation is fascinating and deeply emotional, but it seems that Rachmaninoff wasn't totally on top of some of the technical issues at the time of this recording. The performances by Moiseiwitsch and Friedman are more to my liking.
Fascinating performance. Performers of the 'Golden Age' had style and personality but nowadays Rachmaninoff's extremes of tempo and rubato are considered old fashioned.
there is so much soul in this interpretation--its like he's writing beautiful poetry
deserteacher 1 week ago
I'm truly shocked by the number of wrong notes! Listen to 6.37 for example- it's a bloody mess of split octaves and missed notes. And throughout the whole piece the rubato is so extravagantly exaggerated, as was the custom at the time, that it seems laughablytrivial- there is no accumulation of weight. i love Rachmaninoff's music but this performance is shockingly bad- I've heard teenagers play this better.
paulybarr 1 month ago
@paulybarr
Who says teenagers can't be brilliant pianists?
joelwagnerpiano 1 month ago
@paulybarr
i'd like to respond to that by saying that this passage has the same "kind of slip" as when Horowitz misses. It's not the result of sloppy playing as you alledge, but rather the payoff that is either rewarded or robbed of an artist when they take total interpretive risks. The soft chord at the end of the intro is worth the price of admission alone, and requires just as much skill to present. This is a very indepth and profoundly beautiful presentation, paced beautifully.
yenrabaraho 4 weeks ago
@paulybarr Your comment makes as much sense as saying the earth is flat. What is wrong with you? You also believe you were abducted by aliens who messed with your intellect? LOL
It would be nice to see people who know nothing of pianism, musicality and artistry desist from making such inane and idiotic comments such as yours! NOT on Rach's performances :-)
Bret6464 1 week ago
The maestro has just given the perfect example of cantabile! It's all about his amazing coloration.
ArunGarg001 1 month ago
Hey bitches, first thing you have to do to listen music is to shut the fuck up.
Deexxtro 2 months ago 2
Although I do love Rachmaninoff and his style of playing, I personally feel that his way of playing this ballade is not very enjoyable to listen to. Sure, he's playing all the right notes, and his dynamics are correct for the most part, but there is something breathless about his interpretation overall. There are so many important pieces melodic expression that we simply do not get to hear because he is playing at break-neck speed. His technical brilliance swallows up the beauty of the piece.
TheJV15 3 months ago
@TheJV15
I do not believe anyone has approached Rach in his interpretation of the 3rd ballade, Cliburn's is the only other one I can even stand, let alone listen to in its entirety! :-)
Bret6464 2 months ago
Un toucher d'une rare finesse,mais le compositeur semble prendre la place de l'interprète.
abracadabranque 1 year ago
This is very beautiful performance, so expresive and simple. I didn't expect less to Rachmaninov!
MarlitaLinda77 1 year ago
Master composer and master pianist meets master composer. And we pick up on the results. Nice!
docmalthus 1 year ago 6
My two favorite composers ever!! Rachmaninoff & Chopin. How wonderful to have the one playing a piece by the other. Amazing!! Rachmaninoff can do no wrong in my book. He has always been a favorite & unfortunately I was not given a chance to play any of his music because only the "oldies" (Beethoven, Bach, Mozart, etc) were ever deemed "true classical". So sad. However, I was fortunate enough to be able to play some pieces by Chopin. Both are just the best!!
vickiehill1 1 year ago 4
wow first time i heard it like this :} unusual, unconventional but in the sense that it's like a breath of fresh air :)
atticpat 1 year ago 2
Devil to the hindmost, I'll play it to my liking with my giant hands and impossibly relentless inertia, take it or leave it. Get out of here, Pussies.
nearenough3 1 year ago
I was listening to this at the dead of night, and it fits the mood perfectly. there is something special about this one, it's just so free and full of contrast in the different parts. For an old recording and probably played by an older Rach, this is great.
wonphi 1 year ago
Super!!
Mandzso53 1 year ago
Thank you, theshow2! No doubt Rachmaninoff was the greatest musician of 20th century.
ConcertoArt 1 year ago
why are people so retarded on youtube? bash rachmaninoff and say argerich is better? go suck dicks. no one has any say on who is better or whatnot. as rachmaninoff has said, anton rubinstein was the best pianist he has ever heard. and anton rubinstein has said, we are all infants compared to franz liszt. go suck it.
strikerdisc 1 year ago
Rachmaninoff made this recording called
"How to kill Chopin." It is intentionally badly played.
No one else but a genius could commit such a perfect murder Chopin´s
music.
engjan 1 year ago
Terrible!!
engjan 1 year ago
@engjan u are retarded.
strikerdisc 1 year ago
@engjan Rachmaninoff put his mark on this piece. For a more balanced Russian version listen to Kissin's version. I personally like Arrau's the best.
mudyar 1 year ago
@gygatanz52 Sorry but you are way off! any listener who has the capacity to feel emotions can not help but love everything Rachmaninoff played! Rach is the god of piano!
barbarossa333 1 year ago
He was a reptilian with an amazing talent for karate piano playing.
Wonderful way to destroy a manster piece.
Gygatanz52 1 year ago
@Gygatanz52 u are also retarded.
strikerdisc 1 year ago
@Gygatanz52 Lol!
koalaswrath 1 year ago
Isn't it a strange paradox that modern jurors praise the rachmaninoffs and the hoffmans as the greatest pianists in history, yet are adamant on literal text intrepretations and safety over adventure and risk. Where would the human race be if we didn't take risks and venture to go to places we'd never been before...
Classicmozayfull 1 year ago
If I didnt even know anything about piano and heard this without knwing who did it I probably would have at least guessed he was russian ;) it Really shows when you think about it, and this piece really isnt very russian though its interesting to hear him play it.
Darean51 1 year ago
it's perfect!!! genious.....! bravoo! :)
viktor45333 1 year ago
I can't help but feel that this recording would have been perfect if Rachmaninoff just hadn't insisted on playing with such jolting swiftness during some passages.
SepiaLatimanus 1 year ago
@SepiaLatimanus I agree, Rachmaninoff has recomposed this piece without changing a note. It makes you wonder whether Rachmanioff had ever heard anyone else play this piece. But he most likely did, but nonetheless gave it his own interpretation., which transforms it to a kind of subliminal exercise/. composer, .
mudyar 1 year ago
One rare performance of the 3rd Ballade which actually makes musical sense!!
astroedic 1 year ago 4
I don't understand.
Not that I don't like this version. I think it is very interesting and flavorful in its own way. Yet I really don't understand what Rachmaninoff is trying to do here. His version has much less legato phrasing than would be expected of something of Chopin's.
Weird. But interesting.
FredilYupigo 2 years ago
@FredilYupigo That's just evidence of how much performance practice has changed with time. To have this kind of historical evidence is a really privileged gift.
adrianmh1919 1 year ago
Rachamninoff's palying very interesting and personal in a good way, he truly has a clear idea he follow´s and manages to keep the ballade as one piece...well of course, he's rachmaninoff...I highly recommend Jorge Bolet's version of the third ballade, my favorite.
kolior 2 years ago
uups, sorry those errors in my text.
kolior 2 years ago
I like your conversation, but only one question: about the golden age, and all his interpreters, I would just like to know what you think about the theme of the emotions... I'm a little bit desesperate when I hear so many people playing piano with, at least for me, no idea about what´s the real sense of what we are suppose to do, or better, transmite: emotions. I try every day on my piano to find the way, this Way, and I fell all the time so sad to see the few interess for this Way...
pianiste66 2 years ago
5:50 is awesome
Eztoez 2 years ago
does anyone know when this recording was made?
ruletheworld93 2 years ago
1925. It's part of Rachmaninoff's "Complete Recordings" box set and is also available on a separate single CD entitled "Rachmaninoff Plays Chopin"
LouiePlaysDrums 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
rach cant play this correctly
it just sounds awkward
i like how zimerman plays this piece
sedhglsl 2 years ago
incroyable!!je n'ai jamais entendu cette ballade comme ca!!
je vous recommande la version de guiomar novaes également...
lilycrumble 2 years ago
Shame Rachmaninoff didn't recorded the other three, much more interesting, ballads of Chopin.
Bongoke 2 years ago
preciosa interpretacion me gusta mucho
rachmanipablo 2 years ago
wow an intelligent response on You Tube Est-ce possilbe Thank you
TJFNYC212 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Does anyone understand that we are listening to someone who is listed as one of the great composers? And does this not inspire anyone? When could you ever say that you could hear Chopin play Rachmanninoff if it were not an anachonism? I mean we are talking about someone with the mind of Rachmaninoff making this his own piece. Have you listened to all the voicings and subtle textures he applies? Music is supposed to be creative and fresh everytime its played. He did a great job of that.
hdfhjasdofibafa 2 years ago
Comment removed
hdfhjasdofibafa 2 years ago
i think this is absolutely brilliant; he brings out the climax like no other. he gives this medium sized piece an almost symphonic feel
serox901 2 years ago
Thank you for this gem! Not because the name of player is Rachmaninoff, but because almost noone can play like this anymore. If someone tried in competition, they will be gone in first round. But mostly, I love the titanic sound. I cannot hear this kind of sound from a single living pianist, no not one. I have never heard it. I think the last well-known pianist to have it was Gilels. With his death and later Horowitz's ended the golden age of piano I feel.
himitsunosallychan 2 years ago
himitsunosallychan - you say, "If someone tried in competition, they will be gone in first round." Right on! And that's exactly what's wrong with much of contemporary classical music. Why could Rachmaninoff play like this? Because he was a composer himself. He encountered Chopin as a colleague. Today's "urtext" worship is largely a feeble substitute for musicians' lost creativity, a crutch for their insecurities, leading to the familiar sterility and conformism.
123mortimer456 2 years ago 21
I could not agree with you more, 123mortimer456さん, the modern day music competition is nothing but a ridiculous curse.
To speak in extreme terms, everyone sounds the same, and that is why I almost never listen to today's competition musicians. They are boring and tiresome to listen to because I have heard them already even before I hear them.
And your views on "urtext" myth exactly coincides with mine, I must say!
himitsunosallychan 2 years ago 2
You guys remind me of the old folks who claim that cars are not what they used to be: they were solid, made of steel not plastic, and you could repair one with a screwdriver, hahaha!
If you guys were younger, you would realize that classical music has today a vibrant community of followers who is more critical than ever (thanks to the Internet), and who is not willing to accept but the best from today's performers.
Ernesto7608 2 years ago
If I were younger, I would be disallowed from browsing the Internet. But even though I am my age, I still do realize that classical music has today a vibrant community of followers who are more critical than ever, as well as one of followers who are not so critical, willing to accept what (and only what) others say is the best.
I have no idea how I reminded you of an old folk who claims to have repaired a car with a screwdriver.
himitsunosallychan 2 years ago 2
Remember what you wrote a month ago: "I cannot hear this kind of sound from a single living pianist, not one" and "with (Gilels) death and later Horowitz's ended the golden age of piano"
So you think the good days are gone, and pianists today are inferior. This contradicts your say about "today a vibrant community of followers who are more critical than ever", because pianists today would not be able to make a living. But they do, because many are excellent.
Ernesto7608 2 years ago
No no. I think the GOLDEN days are gone, not necessarily all the good days.
But, EVEN IF I thought as you say, I don't see how that could be a contradiction. Even the most critical listener has to settle for the not-so-good if the good are no longer around to criticize. Else, s/he would have to quit listening altogether. That's too boring.
himitsunosallychan 2 years ago
This is precisely what people living their GOLDEN years think: that the GOLDEN days are gone.
And here is the contradiction: there is no reason for past pianists to have been better, the human genome has not changed. But unprecedented exposure to classical music has raised demand for high quality, therefore there is reason for having better pianists today.
There are enough good recordings from the past that today's pianists would not have a chance if they were worse.
Ernesto7608 2 years ago
Yes, I agree with you that there is reason for having better pianists today, one reason being the one you gave.
But, I am not talking from reason when I say I feel the golden days are gone. It is from listening to recordings and performances.
To my ears at least, Rachmaninoff is without question greater than any of the actively performing pianists I know. This is so clear to me that I feel almost silly saying so. (Argerich and Pollini in their young days were very very great. Sadly, not now.)
himitsunosallychan 2 years ago 4
There is nothing silly in that, our taste is what matters, and it is beyond discussion. Fortunately there are many good recordings in the more expressive style of Rachmaninoff.
I also notice that often there is something special in the performance of a young artist that gets diminished over time. We recognize this in those who gain fame very early, a Kissin, Pogorelish, Yundi Li, and surely others who are on the verge of success right now and we will appreciate in the future.
Ernesto7608 2 years ago
I am glad we are really talking now.
Curiously, your second paragraph expresses what I have been thinking. I find it true also also of Midori (the violinist). The performances from her early career simply amaze me. Nowadays though, I am not so sure. Maybe something similar happened with Argerich and Pollini.
And (I hope you won't think I'm kidding, because I am not) Lang Lang, whose Rach#3 with Dutoit here on YouTube brings tears to my eyes, is for me the living champion of the expressive.
himitsunosallychan 2 years ago
No, I don't think you are kidding. I had a similar experience with Lang Lang. I always thought of him as a clown, until I heard his interpretation of Mozart's sonata K 330 here on youtube. He plays it practically perfect, with none of the silliness one associates with him from the way he looks...
Ernesto7608 2 years ago
@123mortimer456 Liszt called it the Pontious Pilate offense, washing your hands of a piece by adhering directly to the text.
Gargantupimp 1 year ago
@123mortimer456 exactly, i totally agree with you. in today's culture, we place the composers on a shrine as "gods,", and the score as the "bible." we don't regard the score as an unfinished process, and are afraid to do anything creative. pollini is the best example.
ugolinoandhissons 1 year ago
@ugolinoandhissons Wait till you hear Gould's Chopin.
KeenAmateur 1 year ago
From Rachmaninov who had the technique to play anything at any speed you find here his personal and highly musical take on Chopin. Long melodic lines are present and sing clearly while the other parts are played as orchestral support. Played as a Master chooses to do so.
lamorlayefrance 2 years ago 3
I think that rachmaninov is plating this because the record company required it of him. It sounds like Rach didn't care much for this piece. This seems to be the playing of someone who is bored to tears with the composition that he is playing. Call me crazy..........
aardvaark069 2 years ago
@aardvaark069 You're crazy!
gbosey 2 years ago
O.K. gbosey, I accept it. Still, I think this sounds like the playing of someone who is bored.
aardvaark069 2 years ago
I think this is a rare recording, maybe interesting cuz is Rach's but I dont like it, I think Zimmerman's is best. Whatever, I prefer listening Rachmaninoff with his own masterpieces. Cheers.
marvinracer88 3 years ago 2
what a baller.he didnt give a fuck. over embelleshed slow section and insane speed on the piu mosso
Rookdmc 3 years ago 2
hahaha word. so badass
ahso19 2 years ago
a very rare version! haha crazy rachmaninoff!
mestreliszt 3 years ago
It's good stoned.
friendfarang 3 years ago
lol well that could be said for many of these videos :)
Weimartoccata 3 years ago
Have you tried Vivaldi stoned? I've heard that's quite the trip.
Oreganoseasoner 3 years ago
imagine if you'd never heard it before, like me... it's beautiful no matter how apparently misinterpreted it is from reading the comments...
giandoe 3 years ago 4
Interesting historical recording!
vincecharus 3 years ago
Just listen and enjoy :)
fanniandwads 3 years ago 2
It's funny to see some people get so very wound up about somebody else's comment: so what somebody thinks it's not that good. I myself think it's a great performance of a great musician, but I could understand why somebody else wouldn't like it or prefer another version. No use saying someone's "probably the most stupid person on earth" or something like that, I mean, come on..
Fader45 3 years ago 2
Another thing that needs to be taken into account is that Rachmaninoff was a product of late 19th century Russian pianism. Chopin himself was viewed differently, as was Romanticism itself. Chopin and Rachmaninoff were only separated by about 1/2 century. Today we have a different perspective with Romanticism completely behind us - and a more studied view of the music of that time. We need to take A LOT into account when hearing these old masters; esp. Rach - one of the greatest of 20th c.
musicformillions 3 years ago
The rubato is just amazing.
aewanko300 3 years ago
Why don't you learn from these people and try not to sound like the next concours-contestant who treats music like some people treat the bible. Be unique, and all that matters is that you can entertain an audience for several minutes!
keesz1968 3 years ago
I think some people here lack imagination, and a sense of their place in history. This is the performance of a great artist, who as you can hear stands well above the level of difficulty. This recording gives you an insight in how someone of great knowledge would do it. There are others, and they do it well too. (read next)
keesz1968 3 years ago
this is his own way of playing, no one can judge it, so let's enjoy instead of giving some shitty comments.
laqin007 3 years ago
I believe that judging an interpretation like this one is awfully difficult, you have to take into account a hell lot of elements; but saying it can't be judged is too much, it means that even experts and excellent musicians are incapable of telling what has and what hasn't been done well. I can't judge it, I'm no expert, but I know that there's some good ways and some bad ways of doing things. I assure you all MY interpretation of this piece is awful for everyone who might care to judge it.
Corpantano 3 years ago
Judging is only relative to one or more person. What a judge may find bad might be good for another. So in the end, judging is pointless.
Cleroth 3 years ago 2
I think I get your point, I only want you to grant me that there are some things (maybe too few, but that in the end there ARE), that are almost equally judged by almost anyone. That's what I meant proposing my interpretation as subject of jusdgement, which would be, for anyone, a bad interpretation.
Corpantano 3 years ago
We have to be careful of extreme points of view, because you are canceling experience: in experience we DO think there are some good things and some bad things, and some others that will be good for anyone expert in that matter. If you're sick, you'll never give the same weigh to any guy's advise and the advise of a physician. You will go for the one you consider 'expert', that is, 'the best judge' in sickness matters. The same here, there are some that CAN judge better that some like you or me.
Corpantano 3 years ago
Whatever, dude. It's just a piece of music, it's not killing anyone.
Cleroth 3 years ago
the problem is people tend to look at matters such as this and think of it in terms of "correctness." It's up to the individual to decide whether or not musical interpretation is acceptable.
cmessier51 3 years ago 2
wow
PIAN0PLAYER5 3 years ago
j'adore rachmaninoff chacun sa performance et si ca deplait a certains...ils ont cas ecouter une autre version moi elle me parle musicalement et j'adhere a la musique rachmaninovienne ^^
Chacun interprete la musique comme il le veut merde ! :)
antony59370 3 years ago
Insperetion*
RomanticNotes 3 years ago
So Bad Inspertion.
RomanticNotes 3 years ago
I disagree with this masterful performance's interpretation. Allegretto is NOT this fast. Also, one can't change the rhythm of a piece arbitrarily. Sure, Rachmaninoff is one of the greatest ever. But even he cannot push the tempo this quickly.
-Leodwm366: I'd say channeling the composer nowadays is now musically acceptable. Horowitizian interpretations are no longer the norm.
etawakimasi 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
and thats a damn shame.
serox901 3 years ago
Please, superficial people, just listen and see that all of you are in front of one of the greatest musicians ever!!!! Try to full your emptiness with the master's message!
famoso1958 3 years ago 2
I agree 100%
akagrin 3 years ago
fill?
cmessier51 3 years ago
why did chopin bother writing dynamics or tempo markings? for them to be ignored so that osmeone else coulkd re-interpret them as they see fit. sorry, and i can't believe i'm goping to say this, but i think rachmanninov has gone too far and he has distorted this piece up to the point at which it ceases to be a ballade, it shuold be called "no. 3 according to rach." because it seriously bears no resemblance to how chopin wrote it. he should have marked it con molto rubato
barneyfifty 3 years ago
To be honest I don't think Chopin would have had a problem with how Rachmaninoff plays this piece. Rach has a tremendous mind as a composer, and it's uniqueness is a good trait I think. Besides, I challenge you to listen to the top 20 recordings of this piece.You will notice that each one sounds almost like a different piece. So if this is going to far, what then are all the others? Anyway, I am sorry for your lack of musical education. Its a rampant plague these days.
Weimartoccata 3 years ago 16
not nearly as rampant a plague as bad manners, clearly. i spent ten months learning this piece as part of my final recital for my music degree and learned to play it exactly as indicated in chopin's urtext. I even apologised for positing an opinion which could be considered disrespectful. I have nothing but respect for Rach and do not disapprove of his endeavour. However, I feel that this particular performance bears very little resemblance to 'the original' and as such, I dislike it.
barneyfifty 2 years ago
Well I also doubt Rach's interp. would be valid today if offered. different teachers may demand more or less adherence to the text. It's always helpful and a good idea to learn it with the exact printed note values first, then you know where to begin, at least. I would hope though that once you had learned the printed note values your teacher would allow for some liberties of interpretation? but perhaps not. Certainly there are also wrong ways of taking "liberties" with the rhythm.
Weimartoccata 2 years ago
however don't mistake my above comment to mean that Rachmaninoff's playing isn't absolutely fantastic. It just wouldn't be accepted from a student to differ so widely from the text, but this is due to the fact that there are few if any students today that have such a honed sense of pulse. Ironically, Rachmaninoff's departure from the "urtext" only makes the motives in the music stand out more, like high-def TV. Students have a tendency to arbitrarily obscure the rhythm with their rubato.
Weimartoccata 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
ulitseful 1 year ago
@ulitseful in English,, por favor??
alleluiacone26 1 year ago
@Weimartoccata Lack of musical education? Or to much of it? Either way we have entered a absurd age that neglects musicality, for a artificial and abstract need for fidelity to a piece of paper.
Gargantupimp 1 year ago
How can anybody say this is too fast? You should just concentrate on the music and enjoy one of the best interpretations of the piece i have heard so far.
PS i play most parts faster than him.
manuFUNKture 3 years ago
BECAUSE, there is a big difference between allegretto and presto.
etawakimasi 3 years ago
Rachmaninov played Chopin like no other pianist. He played with his own compositional insight, every phrase and dynamic was planned according to his own set of guidelines. Just because you'd disagree with his interpretation doesn't allow you to put it down. Here's a pianist/composer to spent hours and hours at his craft and played everything with artistic sensibility and impetus. When you hear Chopin playing like this, you know it's Rach. Listen to his playing of the Minute Waltz, do you like?
laffeycaffey 3 years ago 3
wow after listening to a few more modern performances, i hear how the tuning in this performance is noticeably lower.
meeeeeert 3 years ago
a message for 'professor' jbalni1:looks for me like you knew Chopin in person.I have been reading thousands books about Chopin,unfortunately I never heard nothing about you?!Must be mistake.
Let me tell you my dear-don't even try talk about music,as I believe my grade 1 pupil would give better explanation on this awesome interpretation.I really feel sorry for you darkness.
okiou456 3 years ago
Talking about music in terms of right-wrong & similar categories produces all kind of delirious/hilarious results like those here. Comments refer to what exactly?? A comment on a verbal expression of the impression of X produced during the listening to the interpretation of a graphic-generic version written by Chopin to match his own inner accoustic images - played by Rachmaninov... What EXACTLY is right or distorted?
Pianist
m3numorut 3 years ago
Interesting approach to Chopin and one not often followed nowadays. I those years people still went to concerts to hear something special in interpretation, excentric, almost hurried parts like these included. As Cortot admirer I'm used to this, but I understand why some people reject anything departing from what seems to be fixed completely by the score. But: the score is only the means, not the final goal and right or wrong in interpretation is much more difficult to define...
donthuis 3 years ago
I agree that he plays (in my opinion) too fast on that moment. But the pianist is free to do that but it's just not my style. Remarkable that the part from 5:30 sounds more like a happy waltz:)
michielroosen 3 years ago
The inbalance of your stomach is of little importance to me, as is your perception that clearly is about either right or wrong notes, or about tempo. Try to understand a little bit more about the movement of music and then try again to say something sensible about performing. Because your premature comment is hardly worth replying...good luck in your musical development!
allegrissimo 3 years ago
jbalni1, WHAT?! Should be much slower? According to who? Did your teacher tell you that? Was your teacher Chopin and did he tell you he would throw up at this tempo?
allegrissimo 3 years ago
Puts every other performance I've heard in the shade!
54spiritedwill54 3 years ago
it's so not like the text says.. anyways.. although it totaly changes the message of the piece, it is a very very powerful interpretation ..
deandusk 3 years ago
Rachmaninoff was known to have given very strange interpretations of many pieces. To our ears they're bound to sound even more strange. It's very interesting and delightful to listen to him, though i'm sure very few people would interpret the way he does.
ezpiman 3 years ago
Yes!!!!!!!!!That's it!!
He understands this ballade. We should't taking this piece too serios. This ballade has scherzos character and I like this accomplishment more than e.g. zimmerman playing :)
BigAllScriabin 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
nooooo way !!! i think he was drank when he playd it
check the tempo guys !!!
q8pianist 3 years ago
This is called the rubato, idiot...
K189T 3 years ago 2
I respect Mr. Rachmaninov too much, but i sincerely don´t feel attracted to his approach of this piece
jorgeazamora73 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
sorry, this is no good.
ibclappin 3 years ago
its rachmaninov playing!!! the only thing you're allowed to say is 1) fucking amazing, or 2) I dont understand, but never its no good cause you know shit all next to rachmaninov who is at a level of beethoven and mozart.
chopin8826 3 years ago
And you are Not allowed to use obscen language when talking about Rachmaninov..with capaital R by the way.Goodnight sweetheart.
abmsghost 3 years ago
Ha youre right...sorry
chopin8826 3 years ago
That's lame. The use of an 'argumentum ad verecundiam' always indicates a lack of proper argumentation..
Fader45 3 years ago
Like to explain?
Haeronthegreat 3 years ago
Beautiful. Only a few ppl can appreciate this. It is really his heart that is more important than all the "techniques of expression" that we are taught and pay attention too. This is awesome.
alexongcs 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The ending is almost "ah I cant wait for this to be over" and just rushes. I dont know, One version I do like though is Idel Biret's. : )
tothemax91 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I dont like it
Snaaak88 3 years ago
sorry was tryin to reply to organman52 :o
jonnybosch1988 3 years ago
i LOVE the stretto at the end
trunks2861 3 years ago
i was JUST reading something about this particular interpretation today . . . Rachmaninoff put MUCH intention behind this performance. He certainly knew what he was doing and I'm sure there is much we can learn from this if we extract his musical reasons and messages . . . remember this is Rachmaninoff playing Chopin.
trunks2861 3 years ago
what were you reading? I'd like to find it and read it
fredslu 3 years ago
Please, do not criticize a genius master like Rachmaninoff with idiotic comments. This is a legendary recording and a testimony of Rachmaninoff's interpretative genius. It is blessed with his incredible singing tone, eloquent phrasing and superb sense of organization. Don't say it's bad just because you don't agree with it or like some other recording more. Learn to appreciate different interpretations of a music piece. And no, you don't know how Chopin wanted this ballad to be played.
DaHeichef 3 years ago 11
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You're delusional.
organman52 3 years ago
You're an ignoramus.
DaHeichef 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is your right to believe that.
organman52 3 years ago
its nice
crackapolo 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is a gross distortion of Chopin's masterpiece. I guess because he's Rachmaninov, he can make the piece unrecognizable. Wrong. The rhythm is awful and the liberties are extreme. How dare ANYONE mutilate Chopin [or any master] like this? This is the worst playing of this piece ever recorded. It's butchery, plain and simple.
organman52 3 years ago
Idiot
gaystereotype 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ooh - I touched a nerve.
organman52 3 years ago
haha you touched a nerve... more like u need more nerves... so u can think out and sort it out within your brain that rachmaninoff is one of the greatest pianists ever... he's interpretation is to be followed.. it's absolute. n yeah.... idiot...
moozzmclaren 3 years ago
It's Rachmaninov and he's allowed to interpret however he wants! He forgot to ask your opinion sorry!
EilisErina 3 years ago 5
Yes he IS allowed to 'interpret' however he wants. But it is simply not the same piece Frederic Chopin wrote in 1842. It is distorted beyond recognition. If you don't hear that, you need some guidance in STYLE and STRUCTURE.
organman52 3 years ago
I don't I will need ANY guidance!
EilisErina 3 years ago
I know interpretation is a matter of opinion but I think Rachmaninoff's interpretation is faultless. I enjoyed this recording very much. Also i think rachmaninoffs style of playing would be much closer to chopin's than most modern performers...THere i said it lol
jonnybosch1988 3 years ago 5
Well, one of us has to be wrong. I think it's you and you think it's me. Beyond that, what is there to talk about?
organman52 3 years ago
lol
jonnybosch1988 3 years ago
I'd wager that we wouldn't always agree with Chopin's performances of his own works. The style of playing would be even more different to our ears than this Rach recording. First, neither Chopin nor Rach would have played a piece the same way twice. Secondly, we are not used to variations in tempo that were documented to have been the norm in the 19th century. And third, there are some additional differences just because the instruments of Chopin's day were so different from ours.
3cplantin 2 years ago 4
mmmm =/ miren alguno de los que aquí hablaron expresa su preferencia por simerman, real es que el tiene mejor tecnica, pero más concreto el hecho se presenta al escuchar en rachmaninov una mejor repartición de espacioes conservando así el espíritu melancólico de mi ídolo Frederit Chopan.
kkloca 4 years ago
As Rubinstein said, Rachmaninoff always turned everything into a Rachmaninoff, even a Chopin sounds like a Rachmaninoff, but it was so very convincing.
It is pretty stupid to say Rachmaninoff plays this badly or doesn't repect it. No one cared more about playing than Rachmaninoff. He was the first to get enraged if he felt his performance wasn't quite good enough. How he plays it is how he intended it, everything very deliberate. He just interpret music in his own way, he was a free spirit.
CoolWJL 4 years ago 4
Puts every other performance I've heard in the shade!
cynic150 4 years ago
The first 24 seconds are so deeply moving! Such poetry, what a Music!
liszt80 4 years ago 2
fascinating interpretation, but I can not say I like it... I like him more as a composer then as a interpret...
marcelmombeekeigen 4 years ago
oh Master! you played my favourite Chopin Ballade...I love it even more now! :)
EilisErina 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I prefer Zimerman's performance, anyway Sergej is Sergej. I think that Rachmaninov is better as composer than an executor.
DarkSeiph 4 years ago
i never thought that was rachmaninov performance, i just downloded the song and sound exactly as this and i said OMG
heroicpolonaise 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Funny. Weird. Even stupid. The composition is falling apart into sentimental bits and artistic pieces. These seem to be the two extremes Rachmaninoff was able to understand, with nothing in between.
Hermeneuticus 4 years ago
ur jst fucked
skysky323 4 years ago
actually
heroicpolonaise 4 years ago
you are quite possibly the stupidest human being on planet earth. i am so filled with rage that i am incapable of forming a response to your ridiculous statement. therefore all i have to say is fuck you.
jeremyajani 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The performance is a joke. Give me Rubinstein any day. I've heard that Russians are sloppy, but this is really the sloppiest ever. Listen to Rubinstein in his prime and you will see how Chopin should be played: with respect.
jasonc001 4 years ago
Rubinstein, too, is Russian. Idiot. Rachmaninoff's technique is probably the clearest on record.
pentium1000 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Right on, Jasonc001. Sloppy, distorted beyond recognition, erratic, just plain awful. It looks like pentium1000 disagrees with us, probably because her/his hearing is not functioning properly these days - or ever.
organman52 3 years ago
People like you are the reason why the average IQ of America is so low. "Sentimental bits" and "artistic pieces" seem to be the two extremes YOU are able to understand, with nothing in between. I feel sorry for you, an elephant must have stepped on your ear. Please do the world a favor: cut your balls off so you cannot contaminate the rest of the world.
MarshalGZhukov 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this is NOT a very good performance. yeah it's the Rach and everything but that essentially doesn't mean anything.
ibclappin 4 years ago
This interpretation is fascinating and deeply emotional, but it seems that Rachmaninoff wasn't totally on top of some of the technical issues at the time of this recording. The performances by Moiseiwitsch and Friedman are more to my liking.
Schnabel87 4 years ago
Fascinating performance. Performers of the 'Golden Age' had style and personality but nowadays Rachmaninoff's extremes of tempo and rubato are considered old fashioned.
piano345 4 years ago
Which seems kinda strange to me since Rachmaninoff's playing, in contrast to newer pianists, seems so passionate, really.
ravel 4 years ago
Maybe that's why it's no longer the "Golden Age".
gspaulsson 4 years ago