Holy Mollie!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ-NAgDpRVs

Quarter=around 192.

Speed is only a fraction of Richter's talent. Escaping from a sack and hand-cuffs is another.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDUTTRGOJdE

LOL I had never seen that before - thanks for the laugh...

Ah... this has been posted before. But of course nice to be reminded of it.

Our more conservative members -not in short supply- will be up in arms about the excessive speed. Not "musical", eh?

But Richter, one of the greatest pianists ever? Reminds me of Ignaz Friedman who was once asked why he played the Chopin Etudes so fast: "Because I can."

Care to argue the point with them? One of the many glories of the Chopin Etudes must certainly be that they are completely musical at any speed. Part and parcel.

Chopin knew what he was up to. He was nobody's fool.

I am of the opinion that Richter's most absurd recordings are far from polite and often feel unmusical just by virtue of insanity.

I regard myself as a more conservative member, but I still think the Richter etude is great. i actually started yesterday on this etude as a prelimainary good new years resolution to play something else than Beethoven and Bartók. Actually upon close analysis of the other youtube video, I think Tsjaikovski may also be within my reach after all.

A mentor of mine, Dr. Bouri told be that, when teaching a theory class at Interlochen about 20 years ago, a TEN year old played him op. 10 #4

Thanks for the laugh, Debussy20. I'm a huge Monty Python fan, but I've never seen this bit before.

And, by the way, the Richter video is really quite scary.

A ten year old playing op. 10, no. 4? That's sort of creepy and somehow - oh, I don't know the right word - musically inappropriate, maybe.

Inappropriate how? It's not a deep piece. Difficult, yes (I am studying it myself now, and I ain't 10). But if he can play it, more power to him.

I agree, this etude is more about technicality more than anything else.

I don't like Richter's version, it's too fast for my taste but oh yes, it's very impressive technically.

!!!

Crazy, but certainly exciting! Just 1:36--for comparison, I have CDs of Cortot, Pollini, Bereszovsy and Ashkenazy playing this piece: they all take 2 minutes or more.

I find that I don't always "approve" of Richter's interpretations, but they're never dull :-)

Not for nothing is Richter the absolute Titan[/b] of the piano.

Even his Schubert D960... take it or leave it. Yet his courage and conviction in observing the 1st mov't repeat... perhaps the blood runs too fast in our day and age, we seem to be conditioned for instant gratification.

And thus, grand and profound works such as Bach's St. Matthew Passion, Wagner's Parsifal, Bruckner's 8th Symphony and Elgar's The Kingdom are casualties of impatience.

Rather a sorry commentary. Listen to Richter in the Schubert. But do not do so if there are other pressing engagements, okay?

argerichfan, to me that repeat is essential! Unlike Brendel, I absolutely detest anyone who doesn't take the repeat. The Italian Symphony's first movement is another great example. And again, I agree with you about the other works, especially Parsifal. One must be in the proper frame of mind to properly listen to those pieces!
P.S.: I listened to Bruckner's 8th in its original, unrevised state last night. Wonderful!

What do you guys think is the hardest Chopin Etude?

I think it was Horowitz who said he thought the hardest was the op 10 no 1.

I've only played the first two, but looking at the scores of all of them I would think the rolled chords one (op.10 no.11 I think).

Sorry, continuing off-topic :rolleyes:

Brendel, who is always fascinating to read, wrote a brilliant defense of why he ignores the 1st mov't repeat.

But I still don't agree with him...

Schumann wrote that they are of "heavenly lengths".

Check out this thread. xtraheat's and drudged's lists are quite informative.
(See, I CAN be on topic sometimes!)

Well, I guess if it's not a deep piece to you, then it's not. But to me, it's musically quite intense, and too much so for a ten year old to understand (I hope, for the kid's sake).

Probably so. They all present their difficulties. I do, though, disagree with an earlier post that Op. 10 #4 is all technical--no. There is much music in this indeed. I've never timed mine at YouTube--now I'm curious. I am on tour, and my laptop's sound card is messed--no sound. If anyone cares to time mine, feel free to go to YouTube, type my last name in and the Op. 10#4 should be a choice.

Mr. Biegel's clocks in at 1:58, and it's fantastic!

Richter himself was appalled at some of the speeds he had taken earlier in life, especially with the Liszt etudes (see Notebooks). Though apparently he played the Chopin that fast only to show off.

10 year old plays Chopin etude 25/12.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4td_Zn6G3U

Bloody hell!!!

Arrau was seven when he was already playing Liszt's Gnomenreigen publicly.

I never said it wasn't intense, it certainly is! A brooding firestorm if there ever was one. I simply wouldn't place it in the category of "life experience" pieces, like say, Beethoven opus 111, or late Brahms, etc etc. As Jeffrey pointed out, there's much music here, but I don't find it to be esoteric.

If I'm missing something,please fill me in (before my teacher does, haha!)

The more I listen to Brendel (both his performances and his writings), the more I find him insufferable. The musical analysis that contributes to someone's interpretation is very important, but surely it must result in a performance that is effective on its own terms. Richter's interpretation for me is totally compelling, without his having written an article about the piece

The Chopin Opus 10 #4 Etude has to be one of the hardest with it's multiple double sharps. To see it played live is an amazing treat.

Keith
http://www.keithphillips.net

Double sharps make a piece hard to read, but why should they make it hard to play? It's just notation ...

Don't misunderstand me: this is a hard piece. I'm learning it at the moment, and can barely play it at half speed, but I'm not inclined to blame the double sharps.

Best wishes,
Matthew