Overrated techniques among famous pianists

[sevencircles]

Richter's live Hammerklavier Sonata on BBC is riddled with wrong notes, especially the fugue. It's intense but barely listenable on repeated hearings.

True.

Richter was another pianist that just Cziffra  like suffered from a damaged hand during his prime.

He recovered pretty quickly though.

Another player I find overrated is Schnabel. His studioversion of Hammerklavier is full of wrong notes and mistakes.

By the way, anyone have the link to that russian site at .ru with all the great pianomp3:s ?

[brewtality2]

Schnabel was ridiculed by his colleagues for his poor technique so I find it hard to believe that he was overrated. In reply to Schnabel getting rejected from the army, Rosenthal quipped "what do you expect, no fingers!" (or words to that effect). Btw the hammerklavier is very fast and that is why there were wrong notes.

[mpd210]

Someone mentioned about Rach's playing of the chopin piano sonata no2. Actually, I like Ivo Pogorelich's recording of it  better. But I agree Rach was a wizard on the piano. And not only on the piano, but as a composer and conductor. All around, IMHO, Rach is one of the greatest musician to have ever lived.

[BoliverAllmon]

classic.manual.ru

[sevencircles]

Schnabel was ridiculed by his colleagues for his poor technique so I find it hard to believe that he was overrated

Really!

I thought he was considered the best performer of the Beethoven Sonatas ever recorded.

Schnabel could decide the tempo of Hammerklavier himself, it wasn´t a concert after all.

I don´t know how may retakes people could do in the studio those days or if he could have steprecorded it in some way but I expected  a better performance then that from someone who is considered the best Beethoven performer of all time.

Without the technique you can´t make Hammerklavier sound good.

[brewtality]

Really!

I thought he was considered the best performer of the Beethoven Sonatas ever recorded.

um, technique isn't the sole basis on which he was judged, just fyi.

Schnabel could decide the tempo of Hammerklavier himself, it wasn´t a concert after all.

If you look at the tempo indications, Beethoven asked for a speed which no pianist can achieve, Schnabel was attempting to follow the MM. Richter commented on it thusly "No, you should never trust metronome markings. As proof, here is Schnabel's recording of the Hammerklavier: it's totally unacceptable, absolutely impossible to listen to".

[stevie]

If you look at the tempo indications, Beethoven asked for a speed which no pianist can achieve,

is u sho? 

[sevencircles]

I have listened to every Rach clip on the  Russian site and I must say that I find the best players right now better technically and at least as good musically.

The main reason that Rach has got a godlike status today is propably his own works.

By the way, a pianist that I think should compose more is Da Doctor (I think it´s his nickname  )

I am certain that Da doctor is a greater composer then Alkan for instance.

[brewtality]

I have listened to every Rach clip on the  Russian site and I must say that I find the best players right now better technically and at least as good musically.

The main reason that Rach has got a godlike status today is propably his own works.

By the way, a pianist that I think should compose more is Da Doctor (I think it´s his nickname  )

I am certain that Da doctor is a greater composer then Alkan for instance.

Lol, this post is ludicrous. Is today "opposite" day? *remembers back to yr 2*

[PaulNaud]

Rachmaninov's playing reflects emotional intensity, his thrilling gifts as a melodist and his ability to crystallize perfectly a particular mood or sentiment. In his sonorous texture and rich embellishment, he reflects as well his sovereign command on keyboard technique and his spectacular gifts as a pianist.

[sevencircles]

Rachmaninov's playing reflects emotional intensity, his thrilling gifts as a melodist and his ability to crystallize perfectly a particular mood or sentiment. In his sonorous texture and rich embellishment, he reflects as well his sovereign command on keyboard technique and his spectacular gifts as a pianist.

Is this taken from a Rachmaninov promotion book?

[PaulNaud]

NO!!

Serge Rachmaninov, the last of the great Russian romanticists, the pupil of Arensky and Taneiev in composition and of liszt's pupil Siloti in piano play, had won his world-wide recognition as a piano VIRTUOSO.

[ralessi]

Long time no see all....been doing the college thing and it seems to take up much time.  So i read on here something about Cziffra not being able to even compare to Ashkenazy as a pianist/technician? that is simply crazytalk!  It seems to me that many of you are WAY underestimating Gyorgy Cziffra's abilities.  Whoever made the comment about wanting to hear him play the rach 3 (i dont feel like going back and looking), have you heard his recording of the Rach 2? its amazing! Im going to dive in and say that his recording is my favorite.  Ashkenazy and kissin's are both...too Russian, I dont mind Zimermann's, Richter seems to be a big hit but i really do not like his recording..its too mechanical for me, i could go on because i have about a zillion recordings of this piece but...ASIDE from the rach 2 cziffra has SO MANY amazing recordings, i could make a list almost a mile long.  So as it sounds, i'm pretty queer for Cziffra....hope all is well!

Cheers!
Ricky

[stevie]

hahaha respect

i dont think cziffra is underrated as a technician , except when people compare him to hamelin and say hamelin is better.

the thing is, hamelin has around equal raw mechanical ability to cziffra, but his style is much less volatile, and more clean and polished, wheras cziffra isnt dirty or messy, but more volatile.

one has to hear cziffra improvise to realise that his command of the piano in EVERY sense is second to none.

[brewtality]

It seems to me that many of you are WAY underestimating Gyorgy Cziffra's abilities.

musically yes, especially by critics and snobbish pianophiles. Technically, no because any man and his dog can hear that great technique. Hamelin is more perfect than Cziffra but it's hard to compare between them. I think its much harder to be clean and polished than volatile (well obviously). Being volatile invites the "oh I could play perfectly if I wanted to" excuse, not that cziffra would need that coz he plays damn near perfect anyway. It's too hard to judge technique's right up near the high end of piano playing.

[stevie]

by clean and polished i meant smooth sounding, the thing is that cziffra and hamelin have wanted completely different things, and i have come to realise that their raw technical talent is around level.

but i think cziffra is the more creative pianist, and my preferred one on most occasions, his improvisations also boggle my mind.

[countchocula]

musically yes, especially by critics and snobbish pianophiles. Technically, no because any man and his dog can hear that great technique. Hamelin is more perfect than Cziffra but it's hard to compare between them. I think its much harder to be clean and polished than volatile (well obviously). Being volatile invites the "oh I could play perfectly if I wanted to" excuse, not that cziffra would need that coz he plays *** near perfect anyway. It's too hard to judge technique's right up near the high end of piano playing.

You are saying "volatile vs. clean", but in this case of Cziffra vs. Hamelin it is "spontaneous sounding, risk-taking raw excitement and electricity vs. measured, overcooked, and square pinpoint accuracy"
Take your pick. 

[countchocula]

musically yes, especially by critics and snobbish pianophiles. Technically, no because any man and his dog can hear that great technique. Hamelin is more perfect than Cziffra but it's hard to compare between them. I think its much harder to be clean and polished than volatile (well obviously). Being volatile invites the "oh I could play perfectly if I wanted to" excuse, not that cziffra would need that coz he plays *** near perfect anyway. It's too hard to judge technique's right up near the high end of piano playing.

You are saying "volatile vs. clean", but in this case of Cziffra vs. Hamelin it is "spontaneous sounding, risk-taking raw excitement and electricity vs. measured, overcooked, and square pinpoint accuracy"
Take your pick.  

[brewtality]

You are saying "volatile vs. clean", but in this case of Cziffra vs. Hamelin it is "spontaneous sounding, risk-taking raw excitement and electricity vs. measured, overcooked, and square pinpoint accuracy"
Take your pick.  

Not sure how relevant your post is. Firstly, it was Stevie who brought up the issue of volatile and clean, I was using his words to try to respond to his point. Secondly, that is just your opinion, others might find Cziffra to be "haphazard, wilful, wayward, cavalier, egocentric" and find Hamelin "subtle, precise, un-mannered, respectful of the composer's intentions" blah blah etc. I think they are both great pianists.

[henrah]

Until I hear Cziffra's improvisations, I am sticking to Hamelins musical insight after seeing and hearing his cadenza in Hung. Rhaps. 2, as well as the rest of the piece. Cziffra seems so powerful, even when he is playing softly; but Hamelin seems at ease whatever he plays, and has far more amusing facial expressions, especially when he played Schchedrin's Humoresque I also think that Hamelin has more control over tone and volume, especially in runs, than Cziffra.
Henrah

Can someone post Cziffra improvising?

[stevie]

hamelin doesnt really have more control, he just sounds more in control and even, because that is what he aims for, cziffra is by far the more dynamic and colourful pianist, noone could say otherwise.

cziffra has the ability to rip my face off.

i might post some cziffra improvisation later, its really the most amazing stuff ive ever heard come out of a piano.

[barescrotum]

This is dumb as sh*t.  None of you can touch rachmaninoff, horowitz, barere or anybody good.  They are GOOD.  You are NOT.  Quit hating.  Go practice.

[maul]

This is dumb as ***.  None of you can touch rachmaninoff, horowitz, barere or anybody good.  They are GOOD.  You are NOT.  Quit hating.  Go practice.

Ah, the old "you can't criticize anybody unless you are better than them" approach. What a nice way to instantly lose all your credibility. Good job, champ.

[barescrotum]

No,  it seems to me that any mortal man who presumes that he has the right to offer any criticism of a musical giant like Rachmaninoff without being anywhere near the same league, much less the same plane of existence of such a Divinity, is the one with no credibility.

[mike_lang]

.

[stevie]

What is the purpose of this discussion?

to discuss whomever we think is overrated

the term virtuoso is thrown around all the time, mildly, but who truly deserves this title?

partially

[e60m5]

No,  it seems to me that any mortal man who presumes that he has the right to offer any criticism of a musical giant like Rachmaninoff without being anywhere near the same league, much less the same plane of existence of such a Divinity, is the one with no credibility.

Don't get me wrong. I am a huge admirer of Rachmaninoff. However, to make use of such hyperbole and talk in terms of different "plane of existence" and to refer to him as a "Divinity" is surely stretching your credibility here.

Isn't it the very fact that Rachmaninoff (and others!) was (were) human that makes their achievements so incredibly amazing? If we accept this then we must accept that we can talk about them in human terms. I see nothing wrong with conjecture directed at their pianistic skills.

Must say, though, I disagree with much that has been said in this thread.

[franzliszt2]

How can people have bad techniques if they are famous?, surely they wouldn't be famous if they were bad. They all have different techniques, but how vcan any be described as bad. Horowitz played octaves with low wrists, that theoretically is bad, but the speed was amaizng, therfore defying "technique", its all individual, and in my opinion no proffessional pianist has bad technique

[brewtality]

How can people have bad techniques if they are famous?, surely they wouldn't be famous if they were bad.

Helfgott? he is still (in)famous in my country.

[countchocula]

Helfgott? he is still (in)famous in my country.

He is only famous because of the movie.  Not for his playing.
Actually I can't think of any very famous pianists with bad techniques, especially nowadays.

[bernhard]

He is only famous because of the movie.  Not for his playing.
Actually I can't think of any very famous pianists with bad techniques, especially nowadays.

Maksim?

Clayderman?

 

[countchocula]

Maksim?

Clayderman?

 

Don't know who Maksim is...Clayderman is not trying to compete with the genuine classical artists, any more than John Tesh or Yanni, he does more easy-listening type stuff.  With that in mind, he is great at what he does.

I know you know that, Bernhard!   

 

[brewtality]

He is only famous because of the movie.  Not for his playing.

Indeed, but many ignorant Australians, who have forked out the 100 bucks for a ticket, actually think that he is a 'genius'.

[alejo_90]

Indeed, but many ignorant Australians, who have forked out the 100 bucks for a ticket, actually think that he is a 'genius'.

I totally agree, just see the reviews of his rach3 recording in Amazon. Don't waste your time in listening to it, it's CRAP.