Gilels or Richter?

[rohansahai]

Tough one i know....but I tend to like the Gilelsian style more ...only just though. What do you think?

[mrchops10]

Do we have to keep comparing these two pianists? They have completely different styles, different reportoires, and different personalities. They did come from the same studio, but so did Schnabel and Friedman. Comparing them is pointless, even when Neuhaus so often did it. They are both great pianists.

[etudes]

they are both great pianists.
I like them both but if to vote my vote give to Richter!

[rohansahai]

Do we have to keep comparing these two pianists? They have completely different styles, different reportoires, and different personalities. They did come from the same studio, but so did Schnabel and Friedman. Comparing them is pointless, even when Neuhaus so often did it. They are both great pianists.

Don't compare them ..i know they are different. Just give your own personal favourite.

[da jake]

Richter had real flashes of artistry, but I think Gilels was simply the better musician.

[mrchops10]

Don't compare them ..i know they are different. Just give your own personal favourite.

How can you do this without comparing them?

And why always these two pianists? My point was, the comparison is cliched and not particularly useful.

[rohansahai]

How can you do this without comparing them?
And why always these two pianists? My point was, the comparison is cliched and not particularly useful.

My purpose for this poll is to have an idea of the people's favourite. So, just close your eyes and think that if the same 2 pianists  played the same program same date same time, which one would you have gone to?

[bearzinthehood]

My purpose for this poll is to have an idea of the people's favourite. So, just close your eyes and think that if the same 2 pianists  played the same program same date same time, which one would you have gone to?

Depends on the program.

[practicingnow]

Gilels

[arensky]

I think they are both extraordinary  but I feel that Gilels is  solid and dependable, while Richter, despite certain eccentricities and strangeness in his playing, sends the listener (well me, anyway) on a journey to places never known or thought of before. He is in my top 5 favorite pianists list for sure, some of his interpretations are questionable but the good ones are simply beyond the capacity or ability of almost all other instrumentalists. And this makes up for the bad performances, and there are a few, Schubert's Sonata in a minor op.42 for instance; I don't get what he was after there....

It's very interesting to compare Gilels' and Richter's recordings of the Brahms 2nd Concerto, it shows both of them at their best, and illuminates the differences between them.....

[sevencircles]

Richter´s repertoire was bigger  and he was also the more flashy pianist of the 2.

It seems like Richter  liked to flash a lot but he rarely took the time study the pieces from a musical standpoint.

Comparing him to Hamelin who also loves to show off and has a huge repertoire, would make more sense to me.

Hamelin like Richter only plays a few pieces (in my opinion) with a musicallity that matches the technique.

In Hamelin´s case it´s Iberia and some of Alkan´s works and in Richter´s case it was Schumann.

[mrchops10]

It seems like Richter  liked to flash a lot but he rarely took the time study the pieces from a musical standpoint.

  Have you heard his Schubert sonatas? Bach? Pictures at an Exhibition? He was one of the most brilliantly intellectual pianists of the 20th century. I have heard many fair and unfair critiques of him, but unmusical? Please.