Greatest piano virtuosos?

[webern78]

I know this type of threads aren't seen favorably here, but a friend of mine is curious to know about the physical limits of piano playing and i didn't have a ready answer as i've never been interested in sheer virtuosity myself and in fact i have a bit of an aversion for this type of thing unless it's at the service of the music.

A couple of criteria:

1) The pianist in question must exist in recordings (and if not, at least still living), which means Liszt, Chopin, Alkan ect. are out of the equation.

2) Style is irrelevant. This isn't about the best player but the one capable of the most extreme physical feats so comparisons can be made across all types of fields or genres. The one caveat is that the pianist must at least maintain a solid tone and a modicum of clarity during performance. I've seen many performers pull off extremely difficult things, and all though they sound the notes correctly the music is mush, which means that they are actually playing above their abilities, and that doesn't count.

My choice right now would be Art Tatum, but i never really bothered exploring all the various virtuosos (particularly newer ones) so i don't if that's really as good as it gets.  The ball is in your court.

[hodi]

hamelin takes i think.
super-virtuoso.

[richard black]

Rex Lawson

[retrouvailles]

Ah yes, he is a member here. He hasn't been here for ages and ages though. He is a very nice guy.

[ahinton]

Ah yes, he is a member here. He hasn't been here for ages and ages though. He is a very nice guy.

Yes, indeed; where on earth (or elsewhere) IS the excellent Lex Rawson? He is surely missed here by many...

Best,

Alistair

[freddychopin]

Evgeny Kissin. I saw him play twice and he's the one.

[ryguillian]

Evgeny Kissin. I saw him play twice and he's the one.

False.

Either Hamelin or Ian Pace.

B.,—Ry.

[thierry13]

Rex Lawson

what is that ? I mean, the piece, and the pianist, and the ... what? lol

[slobone]

hamelin takes i think.
super-virtuoso.

I'd say judging from this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjjtJhExOuA

you could be right. Certainly he doesn't turn the music into mush. It never stops being an interpretation worth listening to.

[classical88]

If you're talking sheer physical "amazing stuff" regardless of whether you like the interpretations, I would suggest Gyorgy Cziffra as a top contender.

[andyd]

It's an impossible subjective question to answer. 
I'm classically trained but admire Tatum above all other pianists, so would add my 2 cents here. 
 
For jazz pianists he took the genre technically to a new level, where, to be honest, few could even try to follow - he has been described as the greatest jazz soloist. 
For classical maestros, his lightning fast improvisations were daunting.  They could play as fast or possibly faster once something was learned, but Tatum could improvise at breakneck speed and yet maintain a beautiful touch and musicality.  His improvised rhythm and harmony continues to wow me after 25 years of listening. 

That aside, I honour him for something else.
We have recordings of him playing wonderfully on terrible pianos. 
To quote: "Tatum doesn't seem bothered by the condition of the instruments he has to play...he seems to adapt himself so well to their various shortcomings that one gets the feeling he enjoyed the challenge - circumventing dead keys or adapting himself to different kinds of out-of-tuneness..."

Here's a link to him playing an upright that "was not a full-keyboard instrument".  We'll never know what the action felt like, but we can hear the wear & tear and guess.
Also it's unlike his commercial studio or public recordings of standards, which he could reproduce almost mechanically, almost note for note.  Here he's having fun relaxing after-hours with a good friend on whiskbrooms, and produces a mini-masterpiece of medium swing jazz.   
The tune is called 'Fine and Dandy' & is little played now (though you can see it being murdered on youtube by a couple of people):

http://www.savefile.com/files/1549980

(skip the advert if it pops up and scroll down to download)

Regards

[webern78]

It's an impossible subjective question to answer. 

I never asked for the best pianist, just the greatest virtuoso. There's nothing subjective about that.

[ryanyee]

the greatest piano virtuoso is someone who can play everything with ease and is good at every single aspect of music.

[tds]

they can walk on the water?

[tds]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBQLq2VmZcA

[Petter]

It's an impossible subjective question to answer. 
I'm classically trained but admire Tatum above all other pianists, so would add my 2 cents here. 
 
For jazz pianists he took the genre technically to a new level, where, to be honest, few could even try to follow - he has been described as the greatest jazz soloist. 
For classical maestros, his lightning fast improvisations were daunting.  They could play as fast or possibly faster once something was learned, but Tatum could improvise at breakneck speed and yet maintain a beautiful touch and musicality.  His improvised rhythm and harmony continues to wow me after 25 years of listening. 

That aside, I honour him for something else.
We have recordings of him playing wonderfully on terrible pianos. 
To quote: "Tatum doesn't seem bothered by the condition of the instruments he has to play...he seems to adapt himself so well to their various shortcomings that one gets the feeling he enjoyed the challenge - circumventing dead keys or adapting himself to different kinds of out-of-tuneness..."

Here's a link to him playing an upright that "was not a full-keyboard instrument".  We'll never know what the action felt like, but we can hear the wear & tear and guess.
Also it's unlike his commercial studio or public recordings of standards, which he could reproduce almost mechanically, almost note for note.  Here he's having fun relaxing after-hours with a good friend on whiskbrooms, and produces a mini-masterpiece of medium swing jazz.   
The tune is called 'Fine and Dandy' & is little played now (though you can see it being murdered on youtube by a couple of people):

http://www.savefile.com/files/1549980

(skip the advert if it pops up and scroll down to download)

Regards

What kind of training did Tatum have? I´m asuming he was rejected at conservatories since he was black but that´s just a guess...
 I can´t find much info on his background at all. On wikipedia it says his mother had piano roll recordings which he copied. It says he was partly blind and that he was assaulted (?) at the age of 20 which worsened the sympthoms. And that he was a heavy drinker.  Is there any extended biograph somewhere that isn´t semi-rumours or hearsayings?

[slobone]

I love Art Tatum but I would never call him the greatest virtuoso. The stuff he did is hard, but it's nothing compared to what the most skillful classical pianists can do. And even in jazz, some people would say Oscar Peterson had more chops (better chops? bigger chops? whatever).

[webern78]

What kind of training did Tatum have? I´m asuming he was rejected at conservatories since he was black but that´s just a guess...
 I can´t find much info on his background at all. On wikipedia it says his mother had piano roll recordings which he copied. It says he was partly blind and that he was assaulted (?) at the age of 20 which worsened the sympthoms. And that he was a heavy drinker.  Is there any extended biograph somewhere that isn´t semi-rumours or hearsayings?

This is the most extended biography i read, and it's nothing but a compilation of semi-rumours and hearsayings!:

Too Marvelous for Words: The Life and Genius of Art Tatum

From what i could gather, Tatum's education was very poor, and he pretty much learned everything by listening to other pianists. He was a child prodigy though, on a level with Mozart himself, which i'm sure compensated for whatever lack of opportunities he may have had. From all accounts, his technique was already in place by the time he turned 18, which shows how remarkable his talents were.

He also had perfect memory, which made him a fierce card player (ha!) and which explains in part the complexity of his "improvisations", which he probably worked in his head constantly before even bothering to commit them in performance.

[learner of liszt]

Jack Gibbons takes the cake in my opinion. Certainly, Hamelin is a great player, but I think Gibbons is better. Here's a link to him playin Charles Valentin Alkan's Allegro Barbaro, Op. 35 No. 5


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dSqkzsWXlU

Another reason I think he's better is that he learned most of Gershwin's music by ear, including his improvisations.

www.jackgibbons.com

[cathars1s]

I love Art Tatum but I would never call him the greatest virtuoso. The stuff he did is hard, but it's nothing compared to what the most skillful classical pianists can do. And even in jazz, some people would say Oscar Peterson had more chops (better chops? bigger chops? whatever).

A few points:
* Rachmaninoff himself said that Tatum was the best pianist he'd ever heard of any genre.
* He intimidated Horowitz out of playing a song.

That should be enough to establish the difficulty of what he did. 

http://www.network54.com/Forum/154072/message/1173799481/Re-Creating+Glenn+Gould's+legendary+Goldberg+Variations

[andyd]

As webern78 says, there are various 'stories' about Tatum's training.  The best I can guess is, he was musically gifted from an early age, possibly playing piano from 4 years old, went to violin lessons at age 8/9 for a year or so, gave them up and attended classical piano lessons for a few years in his teens.  At that time he wore glasses and could read music as we do.  But he also learnt braille. 

I collected some quotes for the 50th anniversary of his death which you can read here:
http://tatumquotes.piczo.com/?g=1&preview=y&cr=4

Also regarding his classical knowledge, it may have been limited (e.g. when you compare him to someone like Bill Evans), but he could incorporate things into his jazz most unexpectedly.
A recording of him playing Smoke Gets In Your Eyes is on youtube, which is typical Tatum commercial-cocktail stuff.  Lovely slow steady swing that I find hard to maintain, and some not-so-typical cocktail left hand runs at 36 secs and 2min10. 
Anyway at about 2min.38/40 I almost burst out laughing  - spot the very famous musical 'quote' .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMGG2s_UWms

Regards

[rchmnnffbelle]

Olga Kern 

[classical88]

Another rather eclectic contender for this tag, especially from an improvisation point of view, might be John Bayless - anyone know of him?

[jaypiano]

Yes, I heard John Bayless do one of his improv. evenings.  He gets around the keyboard, true, but
I found both the playing and the musical ideas to be extremely superficial.  Just not interesting.
For me, Hamelin definitely.

[aewanko]

Me! 

[silverangel]

Haha - nice answer.  I haven't heard the greatest (to my opinion) so far - nor have i seen the greatest, but I think, judging from the recordings, Gyorgy Cziffra would be among them.

[barravince]

Hi,
I think that Rachmaninov was the best know piano man in the world, no one like him...

Vincenzo

[jabbz]

My two contenders would have to be Cziffra and Gibbons, possibly even in that order? Hard to say really, when you get to that level one seems to be much like another. (In regards to technique!)

[classical88]

Another contender - how about Argerich?

[michel dvorsky]

Hi,
I think that Rachmaninov was the best know piano man in the world, no one like him...

Vincenzo

Welcome to the forums! Your first post was a good one. 

[oscarr111111]

One of the most beautiful piano albums I've ever heard is 'Mingus Plays Piano' by bassist Charles Mingus, by no means a virtuoso pianist but one of the greatest composers and all round musicians ever to live, and far from shoddy at playing piano either.

[tompilk]

after hearing zimerman, i'd put him on the list. I've just started listening to his brahms pc1 and all I can do is listen to it constantly for about 2 days now...