overrated pianists of the 20th century

[etudes]

How do you know how Horowitz played those pieces lmao.

yeah agree
maybe sound the same but same musicality quality?

[franzliszt2]

[Richter. I can't see how Neuhaus preferred him to Gilels/quote]

seriously???

Richetr cannot be overrated!!

[franzliszt2]

whoops!!

ancient topic, sorry 

and I quoted wrong haha

[henrah]

Saying someone is overrated is like saying someone has no musicality, it is entirely self opinion. It is art, and to each person is different.


It sucks that we can't connect with everyone at the same time with the same interpretation, and we can't make everyone happy as someone is bound to be unhappy. Sucky.
Henrah

[elevateme]

now you see why i think he's gay (sucky)

[lol_nl]

Richter is the most underrated pianist of the 20th century  .

Anyway, I think it's quite funny to see that in fact each forum has it's own opinions, altough some people here have a familar name, I've seen them in other forums. This is actually the first forum in which I see so much disapproving for Richter. Another forum has more or less the same, but than for Horowitz. And one forum did a test, and the conclusion (votings from A LOT of memebers) was 1) Richter, 2) Horowitz, etc. (I don't remember).

Personally I think he is the best pianist ever, judging from 2 CDs I have. Maybe he has recorded too many CDs and that will cause some disapproving, they are not guarantee quality, but I still think Richter can play almost EVERYTHING good.

[super5james]

Well i respect the Great pianists of the 19-20th centurys my Favorties would be Liszt for his superhuman technique that surpassed everyone and still does. Bolet for his expressive feeling in his playing. Rubinstein in his vast repirote. Periha with his good intpertations. I could go on and on. the point its that these pianists are not what we are we are all different and we have to have our own ideas on how to play.

[lisztisforkids]

Well i respect the Great pianists of the 19-20th centurys my Favorties would be Liszt for his superhuman technique that surpassed everyone and still does.

And how do you know this?

[stevie]

And how do you know this?

indeed, evidence ive read point that thefact that liszt was indeed fallible.

[sevencircles]

And how do you know this?

Some reports indicated that Liszt could play all of his works as well as many others like the Hammerklavier for instance on a piano that had so stiff action that no one else would dare to play it.

Liszt himself claimed that Alkan had the best technique of any pianist he ever heard.

Some people have doubts about how good the pianists were back in the day but you have to remember that there were not that many things to do back then.

It´s very possible that for instance Dreyshock had a better octave technique then any pianist ever recorded.

People back then often played 10 hours a day since they had nothing else to do and virtuoso music was a hundred times more respected back then.

[elevateme]

well, im sure kissin or pollini or someone like that could play it just as easily.

i dont see why liszt was a better pianist technically than kissin. both child prodigies, and theres nothing either of them can't play.

[sevencircles]

well, im sure kissin or pollini or someone like that could play it just as easily.

i dont see why liszt was a better pianist technically than kissin. both child prodigies, and theres nothing either of them can't play.

Not sure about that. There are definately thing´ that Kissin can´t play.

There are players out there right now with better technique then Kissin.

A 3 year old could write a monophonic piece that no pianist will be able to play ever.

[daniel patschan]

Not sure about that. There are definately thing´ that Kissin can´t play.

There are players out there right now with better technique then Kissin.

A 3 year old could write a monophonic piece that no pianist will be able to play ever.

So, please tell us which pianists have a better technique than Evgeny "the standard of our age" Kissin. And don´t come up with Volodos/Libetta/Hamelin - they do not posses a better mechanism !!! 

[franzliszt2]

Kissin has an unreal technique, it is awsome. Look at Lang Lang, all chopin etudes in concert aged 13. They easily match Hamelin, it's just that Hamelin specialises in rare, virtouso works. Godowsky's studies, Hamelin plays them, but why do people assume it's because he;s the only one who can. In all fairness, the Godowsky etudes are not the best pieces in a musical sense, there are much better pieces out there, and Kissin chooses to play these, and I really don;t blame him. Some of the Godowsky studies are great, majority are crap, boring studies. Although I do respect anyone who can play them.

And Kissin plays some super virtuoso works with apparent ease. Listen to his Brahms Paganini variations, astonishing. His Rach 3, he plays big stuff fantasticly well, and technical difficulties do not seem to stop him. What can't he play? How do we know, have you asked him?

[daniel patschan]

Kissin has an unreal technique, it is awsome. Look at Lang Lang, all chopin etudes in concert aged 13. They easily match Hamelin, it's just that Hamelin specialises in rare, virtouso works. Godowsky's studies, Hamelin plays them, but why do people assume it's because he;s the only one who can. In all fairness, the Godowsky etudes are not the best pieces in a musical sense, there are much better pieces out there, and Kissin chooses to play these, and I really don;t blame him. Some of the Godowsky studies are great, majority are crap, boring studies. Although I do respect anyone who can play them.

And Kissin plays some super virtuoso works with apparent ease. Listen to his Brahms Paganini variations, astonishing. His Rach 3, he plays big stuff fantasticly well, and technical difficulties do not seem to stop him. What can't he play? How do we know, have you asked him?

Exactly ! Kissin BTW is the only pianist who plays the awful difficult OSSIA passage at the end of the last variation within the third part of Rach. 3, it´s a very fast run in double notes ! I never can believe my ears everytime i listen to it. Nobody else in the recording history did this. Then, listen to his live Islamey, o my goodness, he has such an incredible power ! How does he manage it to play this hand-killer with such immense drive !? Gavrilov´s, Cziffra´s and Berezovsky´s versions are nothing compred to it.

[elevateme]

well said my friend!

also gavrilov is possibly the worst pianist ive ever heard in my life

[da jake]

You are very silly.

[panic]

I'm pretty sure Van Cliburn's overrated.
He just happened to win the first Tchaikovsky competition in 1958 Communist Russia at the height of the Cold War, so a lot of his fame was bolstered by the "OMG HE REPRESENTS VICTORY OF WEST" factor. There were articles in magazines and newspapers with titles like "Texan Defeats Russians." You have to admit that he wouldn't have become nearly as famous off the Tchaikovsky competition if it had been 1998 instead of 58.
Since then, from what I can see, he's made it a point to steer clear of any piece that has been played less than about ten thousand times already. His "My Favorite ____" CDs come across to me more like "Everybody's Favorite ____." No matter how well he plays a piece, therefore, there's always the sense that probably five hundred people have played it better than him at some point, so what's so great about this guy.

[alejo_90]

I'm pretty sure Van Cliburn's overrated.

I completely agree. I once read a "Favourite Tchaikovski 1" topic, and I was amazed to see how many people voted for Cliburn. His Tchaikovski 1 is the worst I've heard, so slow and sloppy. Cliburn is way overrated.

I think Gilels is very underrated, just search for his biography in Wikipedia. It's very short, unlike Richter's, where it says he is certainly the greatest pianist of all time.
Gilels' recordings of the Beethoven Sonatas are my eternal favourites, the same with Liszt B minor sonata, Tchaikovsky 1 & 2, Brahms 1 & 2, and Rach 3.
I can't figure out how Neuhaus prefered Richter to him.
Also, his technique was almost perfect (crazy octaves, etc) and he had a beautiful tone.

Best
Alex

[sevencircles]

Exactly ! Kissin BTW is the only pianist who plays the awful difficult OSSIA passage at the end of the last variation within the third part of Rach. 3, it´s a very fast run in double notes ! I never can believe my ears everytime i listen to it

Any videoclips out there?

Kissin´s petroushka is propably the most impressive performance I have heard by him from a technical standpoint.

I still find the very overmentioned names Libetta and Hamelin better technically. Their repertoire of virtuosoworks isn´t smaller then Kissin´s either.

Ian Pace may be another one that surpasses Kissin technically.

Kissin haven´t touched works as hard as these guys as far as I know

I do find Kissin more technically gifted then Lang Lang and Berezowski though.

[Motrax]

Have you actually listened to Cliburn's "My Favorite _______" CDs? Despite the terribly cliche title, there are many gems to listen to there. His Liszt sonata is very good in my opinion (I like all of his Liszt, really), and his Rachmaninoff sounds very good to me too (he made a great recording of the 2nd sonata). I can't stand his Debussy, but nobody's perfect  .

I haven't heard Cliburn's concerti yet, so I can't comment on them, but I do like his playing a lot in general.

[matt haley]

 evgenny kissin is simply brilliant,, technically and musically

  saying otherwise is madness

 to many people attack his piano playing because of his personality, your only joking
 yourself!!!

 his chopin ballades,polonaises & sonatas
liszt hungarian rhapsody's, TE etudes
mussorgsky's pictures an a exhibition
bach toccata adagio and fugue
glinka the lark

these are just a few ive seen live from him,and there all awesome and very musical....

you may not like him,but dont take credit away from such an amazing pianist

[matt haley]

okm 

[daniel patschan]

Any videoclips out there?

Kissin´s petroushka is propably the most impressive performance I have heard by him from a technical standpoint.

I still find the very overmentioned names Libetta and Hamelin better technically. Their repertoire of virtuosoworks isn´t smaller then Kissin´s either.

Ian Pace may be another one that surpasses Kissin technically.

Kissin haven´t touched works as hard as these guys as far as I know

I do find Kissin more technically gifted then Lang Lang and Berezowski though.

Everything that i saw/heard from Libetta so far was just pale, despite the fact that he hits the right notes. Why shouldn´t Kissin be able to play all of the Godowsky studies, the Alkan concerto and pieces of Sorabij ? To be honest i don´t see many people like him in history of the piano. Such a strong, vital, driven sound, such a control - everytime i listen to him i want to cry. He is not human.
BTW, did anybody ever hear Ian Pace ? How did he manage to learn this repertoire ?

[sevencircles]

Everything that i saw/heard from Libetta so far was just pale, despite the fact that he hits the right notes. Why shouldn´t Kissin be able to play all of the Godowsky studies, the Alkan concerto and pieces of Sorabij ? To be honest i don´t see many people like him in history of the piano. Such a strong, vital, driven sound, such a control - everytime i listen to him i want to cry. He is not human.
BTW, did anybody ever hear Ian Pace ? How did he manage to learn this repertoire ?

I agree to some degree about Libetta but we were only talking about technique.

Kissin can play with fire  that´s  for sure but his musicallity can hardly be compared to Ivo Pogorelich for instance.

[krittyot]

It's just sad to see people praise Kissin like God.

 

[elevateme]

its sad to see people praise paul wee like god

[tompilk]

i say earl wild... he is the weakest "virtuoso" i have heard... musically and technically. His concerts and videos are innaccurate and his liszt is dry and played with no feeling whatsoever... he just bashes it out... and i think liszt really needs so much passion it ius unbelievable... too many people bash out liszt.
His la Campanella is the worst ive heard.
Enough of that rant.
I searched the page for Hamelin and i was happy to see no results.. i was up for a fight if someone had out him down... ledgendary pianist, pioneer of may COMPOSERS nevermind works, and his interpretations are perfection... as is his technique. A real god... im sure liszt/alkan would have feared and revered him...
Tom

[henrah]

Yes, Earl Wild is incredibly overrated. I was frantic to download the right codec to see his Gnomenreigen, but I was utterly appalled. It's about the same speed as Cziffra's, but I don't grant him the same musicality as Cziffra in that piece. I used to hate Cziffra's just because of the speed, but through comparing it to Wild's I am beginning to like it.

Hamelin's soft fingers really piss me off, how they move so slowly and smoothly, not like the quick jolts that many pianists play with.


Richter is amazing, but I hate his Revolutionary etude. His Mendelssohn Variations Serieuse (spelling?) is spectacular, and is my utmost favourite. I saw Emmanuel Despax over the weekend (what an odd pianist) play it and was really looking forward to it, but I was really dissapointed from the lack of climax at the end, and the equal balance between hands when they are alternating during the climax, as I feel the RH should be bought out. Richter did it, and I'm now starting to think that it was crap just because it wasn't Richter's....

I need to stop falling in love with the first interpretation I hear of pieces and learn to appreciate other recordings without disliking them for not being what I heard initially.
Henrah

[steinwaymodeld]

evgenny kissin is simply brilliant,, technically and musically

  saying otherwise is madness

you can call me crazy or mad all you want, at least I can reserve my right to call u ignorant.

Kissin except the Chopin 1,2 concerti he released when he was 12, all other Chopin he recorded were utter ssshhzzzeeeeyaaat

The only recent rec i like about him was the Brahms and the 2 piano Schubert works. (His petruchka was weak compared to Weissenberg, Gilels, Sokolov, Berman and such)

His scriabin was lacking in connection between parts and often awkward.

HIs Rachmaninoff 3rd is probably one of the most overly exaggerated and unbalanced performance (Video one and the studio one)

He does have fantastic technique, his Feux Follets was very smooth, and his Bach Busoni Channone wasn't bad.

But he definately isn't one of the greatest, the most obvious weakness of his is lack of personality and belief in his performance.

I even have his bootleg in HK (like last month) he played several Beethoven sonata and the 4 Chopin scherzi. And apparently the person who bootleged it for me despite his performance and after I listened to it I have to agree.

He not only doesn't understand Beethoven (the idea of beethoven's contracputal and hommage to Mozart ideas in the early sonata, along with the idea of Whole > sum of the parts) The beethoven lacks ideas, structures and all kind of important stuff. What he thrives for is the fluidity of performance, the accuracy of notes, and all other most superficial and most easily detected qualities (that why you like him i guess)
The Chopin scherzi was absoluetly disastrous, probably the most awkward phrasing I have heard next to Lang Lang.

Encore Op.10 No.4 etude, which was tamed,  no fire, merely Czerny exercise for him.

I bet living with his mom and teacher for more than 40 years really did something to his own personality. A man who gives up his personality and freedom is nothing but a shell of a monster.

And I often found people who like Kissin were the one who like Brendel/Lang Lang/or even Helgoft. (Just statistics, i didn't say there is a direct conncetion, or is there?)

Anyway, Kissin is the most pleasant one to listen/watch among all the terrible pianists I have mentioned.

O btw, the most overrated pianist is Alfred Brendull.

[e60m5]

its sad to see people praise paul wee like god

Wow, somebody can't stop attempting to talk trash about me. 

[ramseytheii]

Definitely Rudolf Serkin! I have his so-called "Incomparable" two-disc set from DG, and many times it sounds like he can't even play the piano.  The phrasing can be so stiff, the timing bad, notes left out, unpleasant sound, smudges, too fast tempi, I just cannot see what is so great about this.  And this is incomparable?  Yuk!

Walter Ramsey

[chocolatedog]

Flawless yet disappointing performances of the etudes (on CD):

Murray Perahia
Maurizio Pollini
Vladimir Ashkenazy
(disappointing partly because of all the critical hype that preceded it, and partly because to me it sounded like these pianists were fulfilling a contractual obligation to record these pieces, rather than playing them because they loved them. Meiting in another thread – maybe he was joking – confessed to hate the etudes. Maybe these three pianists have a love-hate relationship with them).

Flawed yet highly satisfying performances:

Alfred Cortot (my favourite so far)
Gyorgy Cziffra (I don’t like his etudes so much, but I keep coming back to them and smiling all along for the chances he takes and the sheer gusto of his playing)

Flawless and highly satisfying:

Claudio Arrau. (my second favourite).

Another three that I enjoy:

Earl Wide
Nelson Freire (shame on him for having recorded only Op. 25)
Martha Argerich (shame on her for not having recorded the complete set).

All the above is purely subjective personal taste – not really a matter of standards. I admire all these pianists, and if I find some of them sometimes disappointing that’s a statement about myself, not about them.

By the way, Martha has now figured in 12 out of 31 posts in a thread dealing with overrated pianists.

Best wishes,
Bernhard.

Sorry to bring this up but I'm new on here so I'm still reading through some of the interesting looking threads. Actually, the Maurizio Pollini recording my dad had is not quite flawless.....
There is a splat somewhere in the middle of op10 no4!!! It's the RH octave in either bar 25 or 26 - can't remember which as I don't have a copy of the recording myself so I can't check. I know because my piano teacher at the time pointed it out to me, to encourage me that even the best pianists make mistakes!!! 

[nearenough]

I hate to irritate someone who complained to me earlier for adding to a conversation years after the final posting, in this case 2006.

However, after reading all 6 portions herein, I wanted to point out, and disagree with, comments regarding Horowitz as overrated. One thing strikes me about Horowitz's career; his performances of seldom heard repertoire started whole industries of followers.

I started tracking him in 1953 or 54 when I was around 15 and heard his LP rendition of the Chopin Polonaise in A flat ("Heroic"). I became possessed by the piece and also the artist and composer. Sadly this was the time that Horowitz decided to retire for some 13 years, and I had to make-do with the 2 LP set of the 25th anniversary concert. Notable in it was Scriabin and Prokofiev, two composers with rapidly gained popularity thereafter.

I searched and searched for Scriabin performances of etudes, preludes and sonatas; the shelves were bare. Then after his later issue of the Scriabin preludes and sonata #3, the imitators, copy-cats and wanna-bees (including on private mode myself) started playing Scriabin; now we have complete Scriabin everything. Then it was Clementi, Rachmaninoff, more Prokofiev, and notably Scarlatti. Nobody played Scarlatti except maybe Valenti who gave up his complete recounting about half way through.

In summary, no matter what you think of his playing, his leadership in introducing in a spectacular way several worthy, but neglected, composers was a magnificent achievement.

PS: Nothing was said of William Kapell. Perhaps he is neither overrated or underrated  but just simply superb and well placed. In view of several recent releases of unearthed recordings. I wonder about any divergent views out there.

[general disarray]

I'm pretty sure Van Cliburn's overrated.
He just happened to win the first Tchaikovsky competition in 1958 Communist Russia at the height of the Cold War, so a lot of his fame was bolstered by the "OMG HE REPRESENTS VICTORY OF WEST" factor. There were articles in magazines and newspapers with titles like "Texan Defeats Russians." You have to admit that he wouldn't have become nearly as famous off the Tchaikovsky competition if it had been 1998 instead of 58.
Since then, from what I can see, he's made it a point to steer clear of any piece that has been played less than about ten thousand times already. His "My Favorite ____" CDs come across to me more like "Everybody's Favorite ____." No matter how well he plays a piece, therefore, there's always the sense that probably five hundred people have played it better than him at some point, so what's so great about this guy.

Thank you nearenough, for reviving this topic.  The stupid, uninformed and adolescent statements denouncing Horowitz you have ably addressed.

But this assinine attack on Cliburn is beneath contempt.  Cliburn's aristry won over Russians -- NOT for political reasons, but for the fact that an American, a small-town Texas boy, miraculously embodied everything musically that sophisticated Russians revere.  Big feeling.  Big, beautiful tone and a big technique to project big Romantic music.

Only now are these early Moscow performances being made available to us in remastered sound.  You can hear for yourself -- unless you are stupid or deaf -- Cliburn's sensational achievement.

Yes, he did burn out under the pressure of his early fame.  But, you can't deny the beauty of his legacy.

Cliburn was a "hero" for his transcendent Romantic sensibilities that are nearly dead in this cyber-silly, self-indulgent, narcissistic, greedy world.

To be unable to hear Cliburn or Horowitz's artistry -- especially today -- is a point of shame.   

[mike_lang]

But this assinine attack on Cliburn is beneath contempt. 

Like this thread in general?

ML

[russda_man]

evgenny kissin is simply brilliant,, technically and musically

  saying otherwise is madness

What so everybody who has a different opinion to you is 'mad'?? Yes he is brilliant technically, but musically he leaves much to be desired. Totally overrated, and that hair is 'madness'.

[weissenberg2]

My top 6 (in no order)

1.Brendel - one of the most boring pianists I have heard in my life, and he never plays above Forte

2. Cliburn - nothing he does makes sense

3. Kissin - not that good all around

4. Biret - same problem as Cliburn

5. Tureck - everything she plays is terrible! I would go as far to say she is an amateur.

6. Ian Pace - his recordings are very dry and unenthusiastic and people make him out to be some technical god.

[rc]

Wow...  I only wish I had the defects these musicians have/had.

[imbetter]

with the exception of Rachmaninoff, many golden age pianists fail to touch me in any way (e.g Hoffman, Moiseiwitsch ect...)

[gyzzzmo]

with the exception of Rachmaninoff, many golden age pianists fail to touch me in any way (e.g Hoffman, Moiseiwitsch ect...)

I actually dislike many of Rachmaninovs 'interpretations' of his own pieces :p

[kitty on the keys]

Ruth Lorado
Lang-Lang
Charles Rosen
Alfred Brendel

Kitty on the keys

[thalbergmad]

Kitty on the keys

I don't think you are ovverated at all.

[thetamman]

composers spend so much energy into perfecting their works that, whilst they might have the best idea of how a work ought to be played, they rarely are the best performers of their own works... 

[cilias]

The studio version is flawless but the live recording (from the proms) is far from it,
Ed

Did you know that the La Campanella was his 6th Encore? I'm sure you'd slip a few times too.

[musicalita_23]

- Lang Lang (I don't really see what's so good about him. His interpretations are a bit weird)

- Horowitz

- Schabel (I don't like his Beethoven sonatas)

- Paderewski (yucky playing)


Go ahead, Quote and Kill. I don't really care what you think. =P

I actually completly agree with Lang Lang. I don't really care for him, too much physical movement, and not enough beauty of sound.
But Horrowitz, that's where I disagree. I've only heard one recording of Horrowitz that I didn't like (Serenade-Schuber). Everything else is beautiful (Traumerei, for ie)
Another overrated pianist would be Angela Hewitt. Her playing leaves me oh so cold!

[musicalita_23]

I haven't heard many of Kissin's performances, but those I have heard were actually really good.. I like him alot as a performer..

[john11inc]

Richter, Argerich, Arrau, Cortot, Brendel, Perahia, Watts, Van Cliburn, Ax, Ashkenazy.

Listing Kissin or Lang Lang is pointless because they're only respected by the plebeian demographic in the first place, not actual pianists.

Oh, and just to be really controversial (and this would probably be my number one pick, Richter taking a close second): Gould.

[gyzzzmo]

Oh, and just to be really controversial (and this would probably be my number one pick, Richter taking a close second): Gould.

Agreed alot on Gould: He was very interesting for the media because of his way of playing, his character and the first close thing to an american (although he was canadian) that finally could play the piano abit properly.
I find his Bach interpretations interesting, but to say that theyre better interpretations than other pianists did, goes way too far for me.

[weissenberg2]

Richter,, Ashkenazy.

 Gould.

Why them? Not trying to change your opinion though


And please stop saying Lang Lang, he is not really 20th century, isn't he 22 or something?