# Sviatoslav Richter



## Owen David

Has anyone else heard Richter play live? I recall seeing him perform at the Royal Festival Hall in the International Piano Series - problem some time in the 1980s when he might have been in his mid seventies. 

Wikipedia says he is: "generally regarded as one of the greatest pianists of the 20th century. He is known for the "depth of his interpretations, his virtuoso technique, and his vast repertoire". "

I recall being very impressed at the time by the depth of his musicality. 

He was sight-reading. I don't think I'd ever seen another pianist actually read the score when performing at something like the Royal Festival Hall. But many pianists have a very limited repertoire in reality - they practise the same pieces over and over again. At any one time they might have only ten pieces in their repertoire. But Richter's incredible ability to sight read accurately set him apart, meaning he was able to do justice to hundreds of pieces.


----------



## Caryatid

I envy you for seeing him live. But he didn't bring scores on stage until quite late in his career. He started to do it after suffering from some memory lapses. And he wasn't literally sight reading - he still memorized the notes in advance, but he brought the score with him as well.


----------



## staxomega

By the 1980s he was well past his prime, what was normally his more introspective style turned into even more laborious tempos and occasional lapses. It's a bit sad that lots of the video footage of him is from this era. I know someone that attended one of those very famous Hammerklavier recordings from the early 1970s in England and he said it was unlike any other piano recital he'd attended.

Not intending this to be a knock on him at all I do consider myself to be a _bit_ of a fan


----------



## DavidA

Owen David said:


> Has anyone else heard Richter play live? I recall seeing him perform at the Royal Festival Hall in the International Piano Series - problem some time in the 1980s when he might have been in his mid seventies.
> 
> Wikipedia says he is: "generally regarded as one of the greatest pianists of the 20th century. He is known for the "depth of his interpretations, his virtuoso technique, and his vast repertoire". "
> 
> I recall being very impressed at the time by the depth of his musicality.
> 
> He was sight-reading. I don't think I'd ever seen another pianist actually read the score when performing at something like the Royal Festival Hall. But many pianists have a very limited repertoire in reality - they practise the same pieces over and over again. At any one time they might have only ten pieces in their repertoire. But Richter's incredible ability to sight read accurately set him apart, meaning he was able to do justice to hundreds of pieces.


I had booked tickets for a Richter recital but unfortunately he cancelled at the last minute. 

Apparently he played from scores later on due to a hearing problem which made him hear a different pitch to what he was playing in. I believe at his pomp he had about 80 recitals memorised! I think it was the hearing problem which made his playing somewhat monochrome later in life. Certainly when he was at his best he was one of the greatest pianists ever. I remember a phenomenal Hammerklavier from the RFH which I now have on disc. He played the last movement again as an encore!


----------



## Mandryka

Owen David said:


> Has anyone else heard Richter play live? I recall seeing him perform at the Royal Festival Hall in the International Piano Series - problem some time in the 1980s when he might have been in his mid seventies.
> 
> Wikipedia says he is: "generally regarded as one of the greatest pianists of the 20th century. He is known for the "depth of his interpretations, his virtuoso technique, and his vast repertoire". "
> 
> I recall being very impressed at the time by the depth of his musicality.
> 
> He was sight-reading. I don't think I'd ever seen another pianist actually read the score when performing at something like the Royal Festival Hall. But many pianists have a very limited repertoire in reality - they practise the same pieces over and over again. At any one time they might have only ten pieces in their repertoire. But Richter's incredible ability to sight read accurately set him apart, meaning he was able to do justice to hundreds of pieces.


Three times, once at Aldeburgh and twice in London - one of the concerts was recorded (Mozart sonatas on Philips.) Maybe I was at the concert you were at.

Unlike Staxomega above, I'm not a fan of his earlier recordings, which I find often draw attention to virtuosity - and that puts me off big time. But I do like the later style, after his heart trouble in the late 1970s, because I think it's deep.


----------



## philoctetes

He usually restrained himself enough in the studio... tho I'm not much of a fan of his EMI recordings, except the Trout... the DGs fare better IMO, especially the Rach 2 and Prokofiev 5 which are major peaks...


----------



## Allegro Con Brio

Richter was often idiosyncratic but nothing less than revelatory. I do think he is perhaps the slightest bit overrated (thinking of his Schubert and Beethoven sonatas and WTC which, though fantastic, tend to overshadow other worthy renditions) and sometimes his abundant live performances marred by legions of hacking smokers in the crowd, recorded in dim Soviet sound, and played on out-of-tune pianos test my limits for tolerance of poor recording quality. But overall I think he looks beyond the surface of the notes and projects a laser-sharp focus and commitment to his unique personal visions. I read that, due to his relentless perfectionism, after he forgot something like 10 bars of music in the Hammerklavier slow movement, he always sight-read in concert from then on.


----------



## Guest

Allegro Con Brio said:


> Richter was often idiosyncratic but nothing less than revelatory. I do think he is perhaps the slightest bit overrated (thinking of his Schubert and Beethoven sonatas and WTC which, though fantastic, tend to overshadow other worthy renditions) and sometimes his abundant live performances marred by legions of hacking smokers in the crowd, recorded in dim Soviet sound, and played on out-of-tune pianos test my limits for tolerance of poor recording quality. But overall I think he looks beyond the surface of the notes and projects a laser-sharp focus and commitment to his unique personal visions. I read that, due to his relentless perfectionism, after he forgot something like 10 bars of music in the Hammerklavier slow movement, he always sight-read in concert from then on.


You make valid points about the recording quality of Richter's legacy, but it's important to remember that Sviatoslav Richter was at his peak in the 1940s (when he was a friend of Prokofiev) and particularly in the 1950s. He seemed to become idiosyncratic from the late 60s (the same criticism sometimes levelled at Jorge Bolet). I have his performances of late Beethoven Sonatas and they were recorded in the early 1980s in England (I think) and are far from his best. Whenever I listen to these (not often now) I do become impatient. But during his best years he was undoubtedly the master of the second half of the 20th century.


----------



## Owen David

Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of that.


----------



## Guest

Owen David said:


> Thanks for the info. I wasn't aware of that.


Actually, I do remember a radio BBC program from circa 2010 when a couple of music critics were discussing Richter and the general thrust of the discussion revolved around what I wrote in my comments (about Richter's best years being the 40s and 50s).


----------



## Mandryka

Im afraid that I think it’s nonsense to say his best years were in the 40s and 50s, apart maybe from the point of view of virtuosity, and even then I’m not sure. To take an example, just compare the earlier and later Diabelli Variations or Brahms op 118/1, or Prokofiev 6. The earlier ones are take less long though, I don’t think that’s necessarily a good thing.


----------



## Guest

Mandryka said:


> Im afraid that I think it's nonsense to say his best years were in the 40s and 50s, apart maybe from the point of view of virtuosity, and even then I'm not sure. To take an example, just compare the earlier and later Diabelli Variations or Brahms op 118/1, or Prokofiev 6. The earlier ones are take less long though, I don't think that's necessarily a good thing.


Of course, it's always a matter of taste and opinion - but it was nice to hear my own ideas expressed in that BBC Radio interview about 10 years ago. Richter's 1950s recordings were phenomenal and he was personally chosen by Prokofiev to premier his works for piano.

It has zero to do with timing and everything to do with vigour, expressiveness, consistency and fire in the belly. You probably don't know this recording, which is one of the finest version of all times and made in 1958. *Staggering*, though there are some wrong notes- which you'll hear more or less at the start:






I'm presuming you're familiar with this documentary, made in two parts. This is the first:


----------



## Mandryka

I don't know that Pictures. In truth, I don't like the music! So I've never explored Richter's recordings or anyone else's.


----------



## Guest

Mandryka said:


> I don't know that Pictures. In truth, I don't like the music! So I've never explored Richter's recordings or anyone else's.


If you've never liked the Mussorgsky then it's hard to discern the magnitude of Richter's performance.


----------



## Luchesi

Owen David said:


> Has anyone else heard Richter play live? I recall seeing him perform at the Royal Festival Hall in the International Piano Series - problem some time in the 1980s when he might have been in his mid seventies.
> 
> Wikipedia says he is: "generally regarded as one of the greatest pianists of the 20th century. He is known for the "depth of his interpretations, his virtuoso technique, and his vast repertoire". "
> 
> I recall being very impressed at the time by the depth of his musicality.
> 
> He was sight-reading. I don't think I'd ever seen another pianist actually read the score when performing at something like the Royal Festival Hall. But many pianists have a very limited repertoire in reality - they practise the same pieces over and over again. At any one time they might have only ten pieces in their repertoire. But Richter's incredible ability to sight read accurately set him apart, meaning he was able to do justice to hundreds of pieces.


I'll have to watch it again (if I can find it), but I think I remember him saying in a video interview - that he didn't need sheet music for the notes, but he needed it to remind him of the dynamics and the slurs - for expressive purposes.

He felt that his memory was a lifelong curse, because he could never forget the people he met and all their names!, and many other specifics that most people easily forget. What a mind!


----------



## Guest

Owen David said:


> He was sight-reading.


"Sight-reading" to most musicians means playing through a piece for the first time--I can't imagine a musician of his stature would do that in concert! "Reading from the score" is more likely--it would serve as a reminder of familiar music.


----------



## yuriyauskiev

Оуэн Дэвид said:


> Кто-нибудь еще слышал, как Рихтер играет вживую? Я помню, как видел его выступление в Королевском фестивальном зале в рамках Международной фортепианной серии — проблема в 1980-х годах, когда ему было за семьдесят.
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Я был на 22 его концертах в Киеве, Москве и Ленинграде (1969-1985). Мой приятель слушал 150 (!!) его концертов. Некоторые он записал на магнитофон.
> Что касается великой Сонаты "Hammerklavier", он играл ее только в 1974-м и 1975 годах, всего 24 раза. В моем собрании 8 записей этого опуса в его исполнении. 10.06.1980 на вокзале в Киеве он сказал мне, что это самая трудная вещь в музыке. Приглашаю на свой сайт:
> www.svrichter.com


----------

