Gould v. Schiff

[mike_lang]

.

[BoliverAllmon]

Gould. I find Schiff boring.

[rohansahai]

Gould. I find Schiff boring.

agreed.

[presto agitato]

Schiff by far. Gould sounds like a machine.

[BoliverAllmon]

hahaha I find that funny. Gould is known for being out there and playing in an untraditional way, quite far from machine like.

[contrapunctus]

I don't even know why you even bothered to post this poll. I can't believe that anyone voted for Schiff. Gould actually puts genius into his interpretations. Kind of rare these days.

[mike_lang]

There seems to be a small following for Schiff thus far.  I voted Gould, but I was curious what people thought.  Schiff was the first one the came to my mind next.

[arensky]

Poor Schiff is getting creamed; I voted for Gould, I think Schiff is an excellent Bach pianist but to answer the poll, I must vote for Gould; he is the best Bach player I have ever heard.

[prometheus]

Schiff doesn't understand how to play Bach, imo. Well, I guess he just has a different opinion on it. Gould takes it a bit too far, too eccentric.

Korevaar and Tureck are excellent.

[notturno]

I've read that Gould diverges from the score, so if you trying to learn a piece he might not be the only performer to use.  I voted for him because he has such a deep understanding of the music.  You really hear how the motifs relate to each other and how the music grows and develops.  It so organic and beautiful.

[contrapunctus]

I've read that Gould diverges from the score, so if you trying to learn a piece he might not be the only performer to use.  I voted for him because he has such a deep understanding of the music.  You really hear how the motifs relate to each other and how the music grows and develops.  It so organic and beautiful.

I would rather learn a Bach piece Gould's way over Henle's way.

[mike_lang]

Schiff doesn't understand how to play Bach, imo.

Don't you think that's a bit arrogant?

[anschlag]

I'll stand up for Schiff, who is consistently the greatest living Bach pianist (though I would say Koroliov runs him close!).

Gould was brilliant at his best, especially in his early years. But so many of his later recordings are perverse to the point of being unlistenable (those Sarabandes, for instance, in the French and English Suite records).

[contrapunctus]

I'll stand up for Schiff, who is consistently the greatest living Bach pianist (though I would say Koroliov runs him close!).

Gould was brilliant at his best, especially in his early years. But so many of his later recordings are perverse to the point of being unlistenable (those Sarabandes, for instance, in the French and English Suite records).

You are crazy, Gould's recordings of the French Suites are perhaps the greatest recordings ever made. He gets rid of all the crappy filler and plays an "X-ray of the music".  Nothing is better than that. And, btw, his recordings of the Gigues will make any atheist believe in God.

[mike_lang]

You are crazy, Gould's recordings of the French Suites are perhaps the greatest recordings ever made. He gets rid of all the crappy filler and plays an "X-ray of the music".  Nothing is better than that. And, btw, his recordings of the Gigues will make any atheist believe in God.

I'm all for Gould, and I enjoy his recording of the French Suites, but you really don't seem to have anything to back up your opinion here... I'm not sure what relates Gigues to agnosticism, or Gould to God if that is what you're getting at.  Or why some theorist or cd liner author who coined the term "X-ray of the music" is a supreme authority.  Or what twisted sort of Aristotelean logic it is that Gould gets rid of crappy filler, there is nothing better than that, therefore, he has made the greatest recordings of the French Suites.

I don't mean to contest the quality of his recording, but I am really tired of all the impassioned posts of how good or not is this or that piece, this or that recording, this or that pianist - with extremist adjectives, broad generalizations, and no real reason for or against these things.  Please, people, think, and don't just post for the sake of posting.

[day7]

I just listened to Schiff's Goldbergs and his constant changing of the tempo makes them sound scatter-brained

[m1469]

Appreciate the differences, learn from both, make intelligent decisions, and create your own interpretation.

[indianajo]

I hate Gould, particularly for his tuneless singing with the piano, which destroys any sense of the piece I am listening to.  If you don't hear it, replace your cell phone with a real highfidelity appliance.  I watched a whole "American Masters" program on Gould on PBS in 2012, and came away with the sense that Gould is a fine looking tall person of northern European origin, which seems entrance the eyes and block the ears of certain reviewers. As I don't live in NYC or Toronto, I had never seen Gould.  See the other threads here about how contests are judged with the eyes.  I've detested Gould on Colombia LP's since at least 1971, There were really no other JS Bach LP's available in my oil town except E. Power Biggs, who I admired greatly but played the pipe organ or harpsichord. For clavier JSB pieces I followed my teacher's interpretations, but have branched off some as I learned the inventions she never heard me play.    
I heard a Schiff performed JS Bach piece today on WUOL-FM, and it was competent.  More than I can say about Gould.  Schiff didn't follow Busoni editions, which is what I start with,  As m1469 says, there are a lot of ways to play JS Bach, since he didn't  write a lot of performance instructions.  The variations of different performances make life interesting.  The singing, Gould's parents should have disciplined him more often.  My Father stopped me from tunelessly singing in the car when I was seven, and I've never forgotten.  Sing on pitch, in rhythm, or don't sing at all.