Martha Argerich or Vladimir Horowitz?

[11ngerman]

These are my two favorite pianists. However, I would like to know your opinions. Thanks!

[musicluvr49]

What do you mean by or??
They are both really amazing pianists !

[becky8898]

Choosing between them is like choosing between your mother and father. How can you do that.  They both are so great and wonderful and marvelous and fantastic and stupendous and talented.

Cheers, Becky

[stevebob]

The pantheon of great pianists is big indeed.  (If I had to pick just two favorites of historic importance, it wouldn't be either of those.)

Why is this in the Repertoire forum?

[pianist1976]

If I'd had to take to a deserted island the recordings of only one of them, I'd choose Horowitz. But Martha is Martha... I hope I will never have to take a decision like that, I really enjoy both (and many more pianists, of course).

[omar_roy]

Horrible pianists.

[forgottenbooks]

I love them both equally. There was a time when I asked myself to choose between them, and I almost literally became dizzy. So then I decided that I would never try to choose one over the other.

[minor9th]

Horowitz...by a mile!

[ch101]

this is terribly hard.
for chopin/schubert/rachmaninoff i go for horowitz
for ravel/prokofiev/schumann i go for martha...
but both are extremely skilled pianists.

[ch101]

Choosing between them is like choosing between your mother and father. How can you do that.  They both are so great and wonderful and marvelous and fantastic and stupendous and talented.

Cheers, Becky

exactly

[stevebob]

Horrible pianists.

[ponken]

They are both awesome but I have a weakness for Martha.

[ponken]

Horrible pianists.

One would assume that Horowitz is a horrible pianist because of his name (horror-witch). But in my opinion he is great.

[burnttoast]

Horowitz most definitely, I like his style (I really just like his playing in general). I don't like Argerich as must because I find her interpretations to be dry and too aggressive sometimes.

[chadbrochill17]

I really am not that big of a fan of Argerich. To me most of her interpretations seem to be played as fast as she possibly can. And while that may be great for some pieces, such as Chopin's prelude 16, I'd like for her to slow down and smell the roses so to speak.

[jakev2.0]

Horowitz has more bad recordings than Argerich but also more great recordings.  A conclusion from that, in my opinion, is that Horowitz is more inspired than Argerich but is also a far less reliable technician.

To give a few examples: Horowitz in Chopin Mazurkas, Scriabin (pretty much any), early Liszt Sonata, Mendelssohn Variations Serieuses, Schumann Presto Passionato, transcriptions, all of his post 1985 recordings...are all interpretations of incredible inspiration that are hard to find counterparts of in Argerich's catalogue.

Then again, Argerich is a vastly superior chamber musician. And her Bach is a lot better than Horowitz's would have been, in my opinion.  

Also, this comparison is pretty arbitrary.