The Greatest Pianists

[jericho]

As for my observation, Richter, Horowitz, Hofmann ang Michelangeli seem to be the most revered pianists of the last century. So revered even by their contemporaries. If the criteria is 50% musicality and 50% technique(discounting other factors such as charisma) who would be the greatest among them?

[counterpoint]

Josef Hofman? Never heard of him 

The other three are admirable, everyone on his field. I don't want to miss one of them.

[jre58591]

none of those choices. and btw this goes in polls.

[clavicembalisticum]

Hmm well, having to choose among the above, I would say that Hoffman would come first, with Richter and Horowitz shortly after in the same position. Michelangeli has his particularities and I would not cast him in the same poll, not because he was not a great pianist, but because he accomplished things quite differently. The other three have been variations within a common pattern, with Hoffman being the more libertine. Michellangeli is in his own group I believe.

Perhaps we should be seeing in their commonalities if we attempt to group them. I would not say that there is an absolute first, more like a more imposing figure than the others. There is a strong element of showmanship here that can be used, disused, misused or abused as a classifying criterion and/or confounding factor.

Just my opinion of course.

[rach n bach]

Hmm well, having to choose among the above, I would say that Hoffman would come first, with Richter and Horowitz shortly after in the same position.

*GASP*

Heritic!!!!  Burn him!  Horowitz just second place on the same level as Ricter!?!?  And both below Hoffman?!?! You ought to be hung! 

Just kidding of course, but I am a die-hard Horowitz fanatic.

RnB

[arensky]

I am a die-hard Horowitz fanatic.

RnB

I am too, but Hofmann was unbelievably good.

That said, out of these four pianists Richter was the most well rounded musician and Michelangeli the most flawless and finished. Hofmann and Horowitz are eqauls in terms of temperment but Hofmann's technique/mechanique is cleaner.

[clavicembalisticum]

Hofmann's technique/mechanique is cleaner.

Exactly.

[counterpoint]

Who is this Josef Hoffman then?
Are there some recordings on CD available, or where did you hear him?
I read, that he was the pianist for whom Rachmaninow composed his 3rd concerto. But Hoffman was not able to play it. This pianist is claimed to be the best pianist of the 20th century?  

[jericho]

Hofmann did not play the Rachamaninov 3rd Concerto because his hands were too small not because he lacked the technique to do it. In fact, Josef Hofmann had one of the greatest if not the greatest techniques in history. Anyway my vote goes to Richter, though it was a very difficult choice.

[zheer]

  Horowitz , his Rach 3 has never been played better by any other pianist on earth. like Richter he had fire, something  Michelangeli never had. However Richter did bash the piano from time and his playing could get a little predictable, with Horowitz you always want to know how he would play a particular music, it was the composer in him.

[jericho]

Though, Michelangeli was undeniably the nearest thing to flawless that we can have. Stunning technical control, incredible facility and economy of movement, coupled with deep musicality.

I say Richter was FIRE, Horowitz was ELECTRICITY.

Richter:  Bach, Beethoven, Schumann, Schubert, Prokofiev, Brahms
Horowitz: Scarlatti, Mozart, Liszt, Rachmaninov, Scriabin, Tchaikovsky

Does anyone agree with me?

Chopin is a more difficult match...and I have not listened much to their Haydn.

[rach n bach]

I agree with you a fair bit.

I have always felt that Horowitz was more of a compsoer and a romantic.  Since that is my tendancy anyhow, I can understand him better than any other pianist.  Besides, I this that even in the 1980's you could feel this inner electricity coming out by the bucket load.

RnB

[clavicembalisticum]

Hoffman did not play the dedicated to him Concerto because he thought that it lacked form. Not because he had small hands. Small is relative, wasn't also the same Hoffman for which Steinway had custom - built a piano with narrower keys? Anyway, Hoffman was the measure by which everyone got measured, and that was the virtuosi speaking; not just a compliment for him made by the public, but by his peers, in the open. If we are also to talk about the most technically thorough pianists of a neighbouring period, we should not cast out Ferrucio Busoni. And Rachmaninoff himself.

Never underestimate the role of showmanship in the public. It is something common in all performing arts and not just pianism. Horowitz has most definitely taught that in the most eloquent of manners.

Let's do not say "The greatest pianists" anymore. Let's say...

The ones who speak to your heart and mind more...

[clavicembalisticum]

I agree with you a fair bit.

I have always felt that Horowitz was more of a compsoer and a romantic.  Since that is my tendancy anyhow, I can understand him better than any other pianist.  Besides, I this that even in the 1980's you could feel this inner electricity coming out by the bucket load.

RnB

Exactly, for such pieces, composer skills are some of the factors that create striking differences among performers.

[opus10no2]

This is where the line between composer and pianist is difficult to draw.

Are dynamic, rubato, and tempo marking part of a composition, or are the NOTES all the composition is, basic outlines of what notes to play and when.

The license to do with the music whatever you want, should be so, but I would not go as far as to say one is recomposing a piece.

Horowitz was a great performer, and it was the license he took with the pieces which allowed him to be so, this should not be a unique thing!

[clavicembalisticum]

The license to do with the music whatever you want, should be so, but I would not go as far as to say one is recomposing a piece.

Composer skills as in "understanding" the music, with every possible meaning literal and non coloring this particular and abused english word. This is a very very wide topic, but pianist/composer duality is highly important in this. Music at very high levels (real music) depends primarily on understanding it. Under this point of view I agree.

[pianistimo]

i happened to google 'compositions of joseph hoffman' and instead - got this:
https://www.usc.edu/dept/polish_music/PMJ/issue/6.1.03/Hofmaneducation.html

in any case, not knowing that much about joseph hoffman - anything anyone says will increase my understanding of what i hear was a phenomenal genius mind. 

all these older giants - godowsky, hoffman, rubenstein, horowitz... all seem stuck in the romanticism of the past.  to me, richter transcended the emotional with the rational.  not that everyone likes that kind of playing - but for me - i find it peaceful and not so thrashing to listen to.

but, my background is one where my mom played endlessly this recording of the waltzes ad polonaises of chopin by horowitz.  by the time i was 10 - i never wanted to hear chopin or horowitz again.  terrible thing to say.  and now, i truly do love his playing.  i think good things can be overdone. 

michelangeli - well, he's like his name.  he can turn music into sculpture.  some people can see colors when they listen?  i think i can feel the textures of his playing.

[brewtality]

I hate questions like this. Each is unique, and can't readily be compared to one another. In terms of personal preference Hofmann, Horowitz and Richter are among my very favourite pianists. ABM is someone I admire tremendously although I don't always like his ideas. If I had to choose one it would be Hofmann since he has been a hero to me for some years. I had a dream last night that I was listening to a recording of him playing the Tannhauser overture. If only that recording existed.

[jacobwynn]

Horowitz my favourite.

Strange about Horowitz -- if I hear a pianist of today play, I want to give up trying (I could never be as good as this).  But if I hear a recording of Horowitz, I am always motivated to get back to the piano and try again, even though  the Master is better than anyone else. Ironic.