Who would be the better virtuoso? Art Tatum or Franz Liszt?

[punkpianist360]

Art Tatum, revered as the best pianist in any genre with his magic hands, and Franz Liszt, who reportedly dazzled audiences with his flawless virtuosity.  Is this match too close of a draw?

[p2u_]

Who would be the better virtuoso?  Art Tatum or Franz Liszt?

We already had such comparison on this forum: Franz Liszt vs. Art Tatum
I find this kind of comparisons unfair to both great men. We know about Liszt he was a demon. And about Tatum Vladimir Horowitz once said that if Art Tatum ever took up classical music seriously, Horowitz would quit the next day. That gives us a hint about the level of Art Tatum as a technician. But the idioms Liszt and Tatum use are too different to compare them. I, for example, find playing after Liszt easier than playing after Tatum, but that's exclusively my own problem.

Paul

[marik1]

I believe this comparison doesn't make any sense to start with, as there are no recordings of Liszt playing in existence, so anything would be just speculations...

On the other hand, even if we were that lucky and were able to hear Liszt play, that comparison still won't make much sense, as we'd compare apples and oranges as besides the obvious fact they worked in different medium, the difference would be much deeper and much more than their technical achievements.

That would be just the fact that Liszt was one of the greatest innovators in the music history, a man who created new genres in music (both piano and orchestral); created new ways of music making, new ways of thinking about piano, completely new way of thinking about piano techniques, completely new way of thinking about piano colors, etc. etc. etc. That's besides the point he was one of the most advanced people of his time, publicist, teacher, a man who completely changed the view of an artist in society, and left colossal impact and has influenced generations of forthcoming composers.

Definitely, none of that can be taken off the scale when making such comparisons... But why should we compare uniques? Isn't it enough to be thankful both of them existed and we just can enjoy their ART?

Best, M

[j_menz]

Liszt also invented the groupie, for which innumerable musicians in all genres have been grateful. 

[p2u_]

On the other hand, even if we were that lucky and were able to hear Liszt play, that comparison still won't make much sense, as we'd compare apples and oranges as besides the obvious fact they worked in different medium

I still think Liszt would win. If such a contest were upcoming, he would simply lock himself up for a couple of months to practice all availabe jazz licks in all keys while reading the Bible, Dante, etc. online...

Paul

[marik1]

I still think Liszt would win. If such a contest were upcoming, he would simply lock himself up for a couple of months to practice all availabe jazz licks in all keys while reading the Bible, Dante, etc. online...

Paul

Ah, I am sure he would have an impeccable swing...

Best, M

[sevencircles]

Art Tatum, revered as the best pianist in any genre with his magic hands, and Franz Liszt, who reportedly dazzled audiences with his flawless virtuosity.  Is this match too close of a draw?

Impossible to say how Liszt played  chances are that his pianoplaying isn´t that impressive by todays standards. I don´t find Tatum´s recordings very impressive except for his boogie-Woogie that I really like.  He was either overrated or played a lot better when it wasn´t recorded.

[philb]

Impossible to say how Liszt played  chances are that his pianoplaying isn´t that impressive by todays standards.

I'm not too sure about this. It's certainly possible, but I would still be inclined to think otherwise. If Liszt was able to play all of his early pieces at given tempo, it's possible that he would still be a top virtuoso today. There are very few pianists that can play these pieces on the modern piano at tempo, i.e. 1838 Paganini Etude 4 V2, Grandes etudes 10, 12, Symphonie Fantastique, etc. Still, it's true that we will never know how Liszt had actually played.

[marik1]

I don´t find Tatum´s recordings very impressive except for his boogie-Woogie that I really like.  He was either overrated or played a lot better when it wasn´t recorded.

While I am sure he could toss some boogie-woogie like there is no tomorrow, may I suggest he was not exactly a pianist of that style. Moreover, while I have quite a few of his recordings (including 13 LP set) off top of my head I cannot remember even one single boogie-woogie from him.

On the other hand, most of the time he shows mind-blowing virtuosity, incredible finesse, very subtle sense of rhythm and swing, imagination, harmonic richness--just some of the qualities why he is still (rightly) considered as one of the greatest jazz pianists ever lived:

Best, M

[thalbergmad]

it's possible that he would still be a top virtuoso today.

He might be recognised as so amongst us, but for my money he would not get very far in a modern competition.

Genius never changes, but style does and he might be too much for your average competition judge used to the "obey the score" brigade.

Thal

[philb]

Genius never changes, but style does and he might be too much for your average competition judge used to the "obey the score" brigade.

It's very interesting. Even around 30-40ish years ago it wasn't too uncommon to see slight embellishment, even in major competitions. Now, it's virtually unheard of. Maybe it became a lost tradition along with pianists who actually compose.

Plus, international competition judging is borderline ridiculous. I recall reading about Ingolf Wunder being eliminated from the 2005 Chopin competition for 2 misreadings in his Andante Spianato. These pianists must be machines, I couldn't imagine playing 3-4 hours of rep without the slightest mistake.

[pts1]

Ok, since we're into comparing, riddle me this.... Who is better looking?

Gina Lolobrigida




-- or --


Tony Curtis

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I hope that we all know that there are people who are more virtuosic than both of them right?

And some of them aren't even famous!

[ahinton]

Ok, since we're into comparing, riddle me this.... Who is better looking?

Gina Lolobrigida




-- or --


Tony Curtis

Or which one is spelt correctly?(!)

You make a valid point, however. As has already been pointed out, trying to compare the piano playing of someone that none of us has heard with that of someone else which some of us have heard is plainly ridiculous and pointless; one may as well take up the case of Liszt's alleged claim that he was nervous playing in front of Alkan as an excuse for asking which of the two was the finer virtuoso.

Best,

Alistair

[ajspiano]

I hope we can settle the argument so that I can listen to the winner exclusively for the rest of my life.

Before you say that I can't listen to liszt you should consider (before then disregarding) the possibities of this -

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=45371.0

[j_menz]

I hope we can settle the argument so that I can listen to the winner exclusively for the rest of my life.

Before you say that I can't listen to liszt you should consider (before then disregarding) the possibities of this -

https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=45371.0

Sadly (cough!), she only composes for him, she doesn't do stand in performances.

[ajspiano]

Sadly (cough!), she only composes for him, she doesn't do stand in performances.

Yeh, but you need to expand your mind. She can't be the only person who thinks he/she is legitimately capable of such crap.

[j_menz]

Yeh, but you need to expand your mind. She can't be the only person who thinks he/she is legitimately capable of such crap.

True, I channel Caruso in the shower. 

[lostinidlewonder]

The answer is simple, they are both the same, neither can play the piano now.

[ahinton]

Sadly (cough!), she only composes for him, she doesn't do stand in performances.

She doesn't do either; she's been dead for several years.

Anyway, since this remains the unanswered and unanswerable question that it was before the initiator of this thread dreamed it up, why not start a new thread entitled Who would be the better virtuoso? Oscar Peterson or Charles-Valentin Alkan?

Best,

Alistair

[j_menz]

She doesn't do either; she's been dead for several years.

Oh dear. Does anyone channel her now?

Anyway, since this remains the unanswered and unanswerable question that it was before the initiator of this thread dreamed it up, why not start a new thread entitled Who would be the better virtuoso? Oscar Peterson or Charles-Valentin Alkan?

Equally unanswerable. I suggest that, since we have videos of both playing the same piece (HR2) a better topic would be Who is the better virtuoso? Bugs Bunny or Tom (of Tom & Jerry)?

[punkpianist360]

This is one of my most successful trolls ever.

[wildman]

lol

Silly argument. My thread was about whose works were harder to play, which at least made some sense. We don't know how Franz Liszt really played, we can only speculate.

In any case, Liszt would've played similar to Cziffra - lots of bravado and fortissimo's. Art Tatum wasn't like this, he was more of a sleek, effortless pianist. Liszt could probably play louder and more epic, Tatum could play clearer and more efficiently.

As far as technique goes, that's it.

If we were to compare their actual works, however, I feel Liszt had a greater leap of virtuosity in his time. Although Tatum has lots of this too, by the time he was born pretty much the human limit of piano technique was explored already - we had Horowitz and Rachmaninoff by that time. But he still didn't have the astounding extemporaneous prowess and harmonic changes Tatum did, however. It is said that he "modulated more in eight bars than any pianist did in his entire life".

I really don't know. But as for Liszt, at least he was well-documented. Tatum was the son of a mechanic, did his work in a time where a white kid that could play the C Major scale was better regarded than himself, and just did his thing and died from excess alcohol. The man was unbelievably modest. I wish here were more studied, he was also a great innovator and his "flat-fingered" technique showed us an alternative to curvature...

[j_menz]

We don't know how Franz Liszt really played, we can only speculate.

In any case, Liszt would've played similar to Cziffra - lots of bravado and fortissimo's

Ahem. 

[wildman]

Ahem. 

Yes?

[robson]

I find Art Tatum playing boring and based on patterns.
Franz Liszt wins easily.

[wildman]

I find Art Tatum playing boring and based on patterns.
Franz Liszt wins easily.

How could Tatum be boring? He was one of the flashiest pianists of all time.

As for the "based on patterns" thing, take a look at recording.

All of this makes sense, unless of course you're trolling, which may be painfully possible. 

[wonzo]

Art Tatum and Franz Liszt were both extremely technically skilled musicians. Who is better? I don't know how to answer that. Their styles were so different it's difficult to compare. 

[jmanpno]

Exactly!  Well said and welcome Wonzo!  Additionally we have no recordings of Liszt, whereas we have many of Art Tatum!  I'm afraid this must be an unanswerable question.

[wonzo]

Is there a way to reply to a specific person? I only see a general reply button for each thread.

[jmanpno]

Is there a way to reply to a specific person? I only see a general reply button for each thread.

You can click on the "quote" button which results in something like this.... Or you can send private messages.

[allegromaestoso]

Impossible to say how Liszt played  chances are that his pianoplaying isn´t that impressive by todays standards.

Whenever I start to think that, I remind myself that he sightread through the first set of Chopin etudes at full speed, and then I ask myself how many pianists have had the agility of thought and technical ability to be able to do that. I doubt there are more than a few (if any) concert pianists today who could accomplish that feat.

[wonzo]

The answer is simple, they are both the same, neither can play the piano now.

Clever answer..