horowitz

I sympathize with Gulda here, even though Gulda himself is a bit of a funny duck and not beyond criticism.

The way Horowitz mauled the Liszt Sonata, trampling over all the great music in there and smashing it to bits, juts put me off him forever, never mind his admittedly unique pianism. It is true what Robert and PJF suggest, you need to see Horowitz to properly appreciate him. But that is not a compliment to his music making, if you think about it.

 

I have seen him on the documentary "The art of piano", but I really can´t get what you mean. Seeing him playing some Scriabin etude I feel confirmed in my opinion. He thrusts the chords into the keyboard with absolute ease, sure, but what do I care if it´s so easy for him, when it sounds just terrible. Technique should serve the music, not the other way around.

By the way, does anyone know why the quotations obviously don´t work with me ?

 

Well this is hyperbole worthy of American TV news!

Okay, he doesn't like Horowitz, that's fine. But you can't dismiss him like this. All the talk about "serious musicians from Vienna" and "he does not know very much about the important music" (a backhanded slap at Tchaikovsky:x) gives his hand away and reveals musical chauvinism of the worst sort. And "showing off without the appropriate basis" what does that mean? Gulda's esthetic does not allow "showing off", at least in the Russian "tiger-like" :twisted: 8) manner. I would like to know his correct context for showing off. Heh, I wonder what he thinks of his most famous pupil (Martha Argerich).

I detect pangs of jealousy in Gulda's assesment of

"Well, now he´s dead, and you should not run down dead people" Uh, yeah..... :roll:

I had to hear a sonata of Haydn played by him, and he stood there like a dying duck in a thunderstorm, it was just embarrassing. ..."

Listen to Horowitz' recording of Sonata #38 (?) in F major, 1966. It's no dead duck. But I've never liked Horowitz' Sonata #52 in Eb, either recording (30's and 80's).

Regarding Horowitz and the pre-Romantic repertoire, he had his strong points and weak points, like any pianists in any genre or style. Horowitz never made a secret of his basic dislike of and discomfort in Beethoven, but his Pathetique Sonata (1963) is extraordinary, as is a live Bach Toccata in c minor from the 1940's (urtext, not Busoni) but it seems that Horowitz had difficulty relating to German music in general, with the exception of Schumann. This isn't wrong, it's just the way he was, and he should not be criticized for it. His Scarlatti playing is unmatched by any other pianist, and it's devoid of romantic excess. In fact he was largely responsible for the Scarlatti rennaisance in the 1960's. He also championed Clementi, but no one cared; perhaps this has more to do with Clementi (uneven output imo) than Horowitz.

Anyway Mr. Gulda is entitled to his opinion (as we all are) but he really comes off like a snot.

BTW sorry about the horse :twisted:, Syntaxerror, I meant no offense, that was just my gut reaction. Now, here's a snooty opinion;

Gulda's "Jazz" :roll: performances, now there's a dead duck!

 

Very good question!
So here´s another quote from the mentioned book:
"...[talking about himself as a teacher]... But there has been a time in the 1950s when I liked to teach.
While touring South America an extremely annoying mother with a "child prodigy" came to me. After some attempts to get rid of her - like I usually did in such cases - I realized it didn´t work in her case.
She was so persistent, so I said "in the name of god, then let´s do something" and we made an appointment. And Mama Argerich really came with her twelve year old daughter Martha. I was looking out for something average and uninteresting. She was very nice and I said "what do want to play", and she played Schubert with a childlike impartiality. I was completely beside myself, she was really something like a child prodigy. She started very early, like a ballerina - with four - and had had a very
good teacher, it was a man called Scaramuzza. Her mother was very pleased of course, the way I reacted, she wanted to collect references and already had one from old Rubinstein, and with these references she wanted to go to europe. So they actually appeared in Vienna, and Argerich was my student for over two years. The lessons were very strange, since the girl already mastered everything, it was insane - with twelve years - , I didn´t know what to teach her. There was nothing to teach regarding the technique, and so I honestly asked her, what she wanted. "Yes, I want to learn from you." "What do you want to learn, you already master everything?" "Yes, but please, I want such classical music and Viennese and so." And then I realized. She wanted to learn more about classical music in the european or Viennese environment. So our Viennese classical music, Haydn, Schubert, Beethoven, Brahms and such, more than you can learn in Buenos Aires, and I found that very sensible. So I tried to teach her something - for free. Taking money from the greatest talent I have ever seen, I wouldn´t have managed. She also won some competitions then. After Rubinstein and Gulda she went to Michelangeli. But I have to say, she´s bonkers. She´s very erratic, not reliable. She is also feared a little, because she often cancels concerts, she´s a wild one, a maniac, not easy to treat and always a certain risk factor. For some time she was married to a swiss conductor, that was her second husband, nothing is known about the first one, but she has a child from him, and she had a lot of pianist friends, with which she also had erotic relationships. She´s totally frank to me concerning that. She tells me everything, if I ask her: "With whom are you sleeping these days?" , she answers candidly, and I know exactly, when she´s happy or unhappy. She´s the little girl, although way over forty by now, but when she looks at me, she looks like little Martha with twelve years. At the moment [1980s] she´s together with a so called Rabinovitch, a russian pianist and composer. One of these dissidents that you have to take serious a bit. I told her that I´m pleased and I think they´re a good match. She talks very much and he says almost nothing. Strangely enough I didn´t give any concerts together with her or made any recordings, even when she was my student. But I am somehow attached to her."

 

Nope. It does not work for anybody except Robert (but he owns the site :wink: ).

You need to remove the ="name" from the quote then it works. Like this:

Code:

[quote]This is a quote.[/quote]

Very strange as it worked fine on the old forum.

I agree with you on Horovitz. We can always tickle arensky into a long defense by saying something nasty about him :lol:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1hgzvuR-tk


enjoy.

 

:shock:

 

As it is said in the film "Art of the piano" (qouting a bit from memory). "Perhaps since Paderewski, the pianist who really managed to capture a large audience was the Russian pianist Vladimir Horowitz". Somthing like that. Horowitz was a romantic figure (and perhaps the last in line from Liszt -> Paderewski-> Horowitz) and with romantisms comes the dream about the concert pianist. The Vienna "serious" pianists can sit in their miniaturistic worlds and be serious to their graves but if the wide audience don't give a damn, it adds nothing. They just do what thousands of pianists have already done before them. In Sweden we have a saying which translated is "The club for joint admiration". This is the classic elitistic view on classical music which brings it to its grave. It must be opened to the wide public and unless we continue to applaud pianists who give a show that the wide public appreciate, we add nothing to the world of classical music. We must stop and looking at ourselves as people who know music better than pop/rock/whatever fans. We have Horowitz to thank for Rachmaninov being pretty famous in these days. Without him, few people but from us who really are into classical music would know about him.

It is true that he does not move around much and sit pretty still, but it is these few moments of excitment, the small gestures that he makes that really does it. He takes his chances and sometimes plays faster than he really manage. That adds a trill no doubt. Also, he was such a warm hearted person so you can do nothing but love his character. He never thought of himself as the great artist he was and was extremely humble around his own playing. That is quite the opposite to many pianists and probably the reason why it is so easy to like him. But if you just listen to his playing, it does not always make sence. You got to have the entire picture with him on action to fully understand his actions as he really was a concert pianist and not a studio pianist. I have more or less seen all of his video taped concerts (most of them many times) and the reason I can see them over and over again is that I like his personality. I have many other video taped recordings as well which are incredible boring.

 

:?:
I have seen this entire concert (it is from 1978 when Horowitz was 75 years old) perhaps 30 times as my son Oliver used to love it when he was younger. Not musical his best but it is incredible that he still in such a high age is able to play it like that. The best version of Rach's 3:rd is undoubtebly the 1951 recording.

 

I have really tried to understand why but I blame Chris as he installed this "style" of the forum.

 

...and the civil war begins

 

From this point of view Gulda and Horowitz agree completely. I don´t know if Horowitz intended to bring classical music to a wider public, but if so, his motives are similar to Guldas. And because of this both of them have been criticised. What Gulda means when talking about seriousness, is his view of being serious to the music, meaning not to distort the music just to reach a wider public (his motto was:"Play each tone as if your life was at stake"). And I think this is what bothered him with Horowitz.

 

Hehe nice try Stahlbrand :wink:
But I believe it was already broken when we had the Raid skin. At least I briefly switched back (some of you may have noticed) and saw the same behaviour.

 

When quoting someone put their words in italics, it does the job.


I will be back to fight for Horowitz... :twisted: 8)

 

dw, i dont really like horowitz much..i mean, there's so many that worst them him but i have a feeling that its all pretty much show...i have his recording of scriabin's patetico etude in d# minor and there's heaps of mistakes :lol: not that i dont make mistakes and things but..hmmmm interesting...maybe it's live but i'm not sure il have to check :? i guess it probably wouldn't have been obvious to anyone else except for someone like me who has played it

 

not a musician!!!!!?? Mate wothcu talkin bout.. he don make the faces dat lang lang makes and others so he aint dat much of a showman he just got the skill too play so damn soft!

 

If you want somebody who can play soft you need to hear at recordings of pletnev. That's te soft player. I admire him.

But sultanov in my opinion will be the best for always.

 

lol i don know all these random pianists

 

http://recitals.alexeisultanov.ru

all his recordings for free
------------------------------------------edit-----------------------------------

listen to his etude 25/12 of chopin. It is in the map of cliburn competition