Cziffra / Hamelin

[jhon]

What do guys think about them?  They seem to me very "diabolic" in the sense that their virtuosity is very much above the rest as their repertoire mainly comprises the most difficult pieces ever written in piano (like Alkan and Godowsky). 

[BoliverAllmon]

technically amazing. I think czif can be brash at times (which can be real good like when performing liszt's totenatz or can be a bad thing).

I enjoy listening to Hamelin over czif though.

[sevencircles]

Cziffra had bigger hands then Hamelin so he could play stuff that Hamelin can´t and he was propably a better improviser.

Hamelin´s repertoire is bigger though and Cziffra would propably do more mistakes playing Godowsky´s Chopin transcriptions, Sorobji etc. 

I do believe that Cziffra had more dynamic control of fast runs then Hamelin does since he propably had stronger fingers.

Hamelin propably learns the notes quicker since he  is a better sightreader and he´s got perfect pitch.

[dikai_yang]

generally Hamelin uses a lot more pedal than i wanna hear...

[thracozaag]

  I far prefer Cziffra over Hamelin, although Marc-Andre is a fabulous pianist, obviously.

koji

[musicsdarkangel]

I prefer Cziffra's musicality.


But man, that technical issue is debatable.

[rob47]

But man, that technical issue is debatable.

maszzzzzzzzzzzz debateable!!!

[JP]

Both are fantastic pianists.
But imo, Cziffra's playing shows more emotion, Hamelin's seems frigid..

[BoliverAllmon]

It would have been awesome to see a duel between the two. thalberg, liszt all over again.

[piazzo23]

Both are fantastic pianists.
But imo, Cziffra's playing shows more emotion, Hamelin's seems frigid..

I agree

[donjuan]

Cziffra is an infinately better pianist than Hamelin.  Sure, Hamelin knows how to type really fast with stunning clarity and can technically master the most difficult works ever written, but Cziffra is an artist - You can see his interpretive side in the slower, quieter works... a side of him that no hamelin can do.  And only a gypsy such as Cziffra can play those hungarian rhapsodies with such storytelling tone and genuine accent.

Seriously, have you heard Hamelin play the paganini etudes?? I was left so cold I had to cover up with a blanket.  The guy is a machine that pumps out music that should, but doesnt- mean anything. 

And of course, as previously mentioned, we have that unforgettable Totentanz by Cziffra

[pseudopianist]

My two favourit pianists.

Cziffra is my aboslute favourite, he has such a raw power in his playing, yet a warm tone. Great improviser and wow, this guy could play.

Hamelins playing is very clear and crisp but it is missing that little extra that Cziffra have.

[stevie]

in actual fat, you couldnt pick two more disparate artists.

hamelin is a pianist who emphasises smoothness, and 'perfection' as he sees it.
cziffra is a pianist that emphasises contrast , and creates much more drama in most cases.

hamelin's musical sense is also quite mainstream, his most striking feature is his awesome technique.
cziffra on the other hand, possibly the most inimitable great pianist ever recorded, and thats saying something

to echo that famous pianist duel in the 19th century, hamelin is like thalberg, cziffra is like liszt.

[donjuan]

to echo that famous pianist duel in the 19th century, hamelin is like thalberg, cziffra is like liszt.

Well, Im sure Liszt could play those Chopin waltzes better than Cziffra.  Blech - theyre soo disgusting!   But everything else - Cziffra is the man

[practicingnow]

One is an artist, the other a master craftsman

I don't have to mention names, right?   

[bearzinthehood]

Well I'm going to go against the grain and say that I prefer Hamelin because of his unusual repertoire.

Anyways, there's no questioning Cziffra's astounding technique, but when I think "interpretive side" I don't think of Cziffra.

[Waldszenen]

I also prefer Cziffra because he seems to be more vigorous and fiery than Hamelin, who can sometimes sound a little monotonous (perhaps all the practise?).

[stevie]

Well I'm going to go against the grain and say that I prefer Hamelin because of his unusual repertoire.

Anyways, there's no questioning Cziffra's astounding technique, but when I think "interpretive side" I don't think of Cziffra.

again, mass-debatable

hamelin allows the music to speak for itself and plays very straight

cziffra imposes his own musical temperament, ideas, colours, and rhythmic idiosyncracies, which in many pieces takes them to stratospheric levels of tension, excitement, and emotion.

for sake of comparison, compare both of their liszt 2nd polonaises...
hamelin plays it very straight, a really good standard interpretation and of course with awesome technical execution, but next to cziffra, he sounds completely uninspired, unexciting, and even boring, if you compare them back-to-back.

i think hamelin is at his best in playing music that needs a very objective approach and doesnt demand much individual input from the performer himself.

[stevie]

again, mass-debatable

hamelin allows the music to speak for itself and plays very straight

cziffra imposes his own musical temperament, ideas, colours, and rhythmic idiosyncracies, which in many pieces takes them to stratospheric levels of tension, excitement, and emotion.

for sake of comparison, compare both of their liszt 2nd polonaises...
hamelin plays it very straight, a really good standard interpretation and of course with awesome technical execution, but next to cziffra, he sounds completely uninspired, unexciting, and even boring, if you compare them back-to-back.

i think hamelin is at his best in playing music that needs a very objective approach and doesnt demand much individual input from the performer himself.

great post!

i agree completely

[ryguillian]

"[W]hat suits [Hamelin] the best is music that is inherently clamorous, serious, and doesn't require a whole lot of emotional input from the performer." — Piano Wizard's description of Hamelin

Much of Alkan's music is of this type and he works well with it. As Stevie suggested, he works best with music that has built in emotion.

—Ryan

[stevie]

this is true, of course this isnt to say the music is devoid of emotion, just that the emotion is those pieces - alkan especially - comes out through rhythmic drive and other thigns that dont actually demand much personality.

this is proved by listening to midis of alkan, they sound very natural...

listen to midis of scriabin however - they sound lifeless, and just a bit crap...for the msot part.

but actually, i would be interested in hearing cziffra playing alkan, because he DID play some - some scores exist with his fingerings in them.

would his idiosyncratic rhythmic sense work in alkan?

imagine him playing op39 no7....

i actually think it would kick ass!

[ryguillian]

Speaking of esoteric rhythms, have you ever heard the jazz pianist Bill Evans?

—Ryan

[stevie]

yes, but not much, i should listen to more

[donjuan]

this is proved by listening to midis of alkan, they sound very natural...

hmmmm....
 

[stevie]

hmmmm....
 

i mean moreso than other composers

same with beethoven, i think

[ronde_des_sylphes]

I must admit I would rather like to have heard Cziffra in the Alkan Allegro Barbaro and Festin d'Esope.

[chromatickler]

this is proved by listening to midis of alkan, they sound very natural...

true, da midi is da bezt interpretah of da KAN