# Martha Argerich



## Rachovsky

*I love this woman! She plays with such virtuosity. I'm amazed everytime I watch her play a piece. Her Rach 3 rivals that of Horowitz, IMO and I love her Piano Concerto No. 1 of Tchaikovsky. Her notes are flawless and the concerto runs so much smoother and quicker. What are your alls opinions? She reminds me of Horowitz in the fact that she doesn't do the crazy facial expressions and she makes it look so easy, which I enjoy. Sometimes I feel like I'm forced to watch the pianist's expressions rather than listen to the music. Whatchoo all think? *


----------



## Guest

I like her very much and she is much better looking than Horowitz,lol


----------



## Frasier

You need to hear her playing Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit, particularly Scarbo.

EF


----------



## BuddhaBandit

Frasier said:


> You need to hear her playing Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit, particularly Scarbo.
> 
> EF


That's one of my favorite pieces... I currently have the Gieseking rendition but I'll definitely check out Argerich's.

As for Argerich, she is my favorite female pianist. with Alicia de Larrocha coming in a close second for her Spanish works.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

Rachovsky said:


> *I love this woman! She plays with such virtuosity. *


And you will be overwhelmed by joy once you are able to discover by _yourself _she is an astounding *musician*, more than just a set of ten fingers and two rapid wrists.


----------



## dukas

The greatest living pianist....period!


----------



## oisfetz

Yes, she plays all so fast that it seams that she always has the period. And had to run to the bathroom.


----------



## opus67

oisfetz said:


> Yes, she plays all so fast that it seams that she always has the period. And had to run to the bathroom.


Welcome back!


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

oisfetz said:


> Yes, she plays all so fast


No more than Heifetz or Gitlis...


----------



## Badinerie

I love her playing Schuman. But my favorite lp of hers is the '67 DG of The Ravel Piano concerto in G with Prokofiev's No 3 on the other side. Marvelous!


----------



## Rachovsky

Badinerie said:


> I love her playing Schuman. But my favorite lp of hers is the '67 DG of The Ravel Piano concerto in G with Prokofiev's No 3 on the other side. Marvelous!


I remember her playing a Schumann concerto that I liked and for Ravel, Gaspard de la Nuit is played exceptionally. It's on YouTube I believe.


----------



## Badinerie

Wow! I just checked out the You tube video of her playing Beethoven's piano concerto no2...I may have to get a recent recording. Shame you cant buy the video.


----------



## confuoco

Yes, her *Prokofiev No. 3* is (one of) her the most important and famous recording...in other words, when you are looking for the best recording of this concerto, you have to consider her at least.


----------



## Air

Yes, thank you all. I'm tired of Martha haters. She's my hero. I am GOING to see her play The Ravel in SF this spring!!!!!!!!  

She is my favorite Prokofiev interpreter, along with Richter.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

airad2 said:


> I am GOING to see her play The Ravel in SF this spring!!!!!!!!


She sometimes play the Ravel concerto together with Prokofiev's first. Is this the case?


----------



## jhar26

Let's face it: The woman is a Goddess.


----------



## oisfetz

I think she's a Godless.


----------



## Air

> She sometimes play the Ravel concerto together with Prokofiev's first. Is this the case?


Sadly, it's just her playing the Ravel followed by all these choral works Ughhh! conducted by MTT.

I'm not into choral works. But she might retire soon, and I want to see her play before she does!!!!!! Is it worth it?


----------



## Rachovsky

I would go just to simply see her and MTT. If the music was bad, I would just stare at them. ^.^


----------



## opus67

That's creepy.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

airad2 said:


> Sadly, it's just her playing the Ravel followed by all these choral works Ughhh! conducted by MTT.
> 
> I'm not into choral works. But she might retire soon, and I want to see her play before she does!!!!!! Is it worth it?


What choral works?


----------



## Air

> What choral works?


Gabrieli: Choral works
Ligeti: Requiem
Liszt Tasso: Lament and Triumph


----------



## trojan-rabbit

She's sensational 

I've only recently heard her play the Rach 3 and it's breathtaking


----------



## World Violist

I just saw her playing Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit on Youtube and it's amazing. She captures all the atmospheric nature of it perfectly. Amazing...


----------



## opus67

I'll have to agree with those who say she's (sometimes?) too fast. I haven't heard many her performances, but there's this one video on YouTube where she plays the last movement of Tchaikovsky. Man, is she in a hurry! I usually watch Cliburn/Kondrashin immediately after that to set the piece right in my brain.


----------



## jhar26

opus67 said:


> I'll have to agree with those who say she's (sometimes?) too fast. I haven't heard many her performances, but there's this one video on YouTube where she plays the last movement of Tchaikovsky. Man, is she in a hurry! I usually watch Cliburn/Kondrashin immediately after that to set the piece right in my brain.


I think Argerich's Tchaikovsky kicks ***.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

opus67 said:


> I usually watch Cliburn/Kondrashin immediately after that to set the piece right in my brain.


Cliburn/Kondrashin???

The reference should always be a recording that includes Sviatoslav Richter. And if Richter is not there, take some Gilels.

As an antidote to Argerich, listen to Weissenberg/Karajan or Postnikova/Rozhdestvensky. With broader tempi (their first movements last more than 22 minutes), and more space for smaller articulation.


----------



## opus67

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> Cliburn/Kondrashin???


YouTube video.  




And the Argerich video: 






> The reference should always be a recording that includes Sviatoslav Richter. And if Richter is not there, take some Gilels.
> 
> As an antidote to Argerich, listen to Weissenberg/Karajan or Postnikova/Rozhdestvensky. With broader tempi (their first movements last more than 22 minutes), and more space for smaller articulation.


I don't have Tchaikovsky's PC on CD - yet, but I'll take those suggestions. Thanks.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

Gilels: 




At the Brussels Piano competiton in 1938, which Gilels won playing the Liszt-Busoni Figaro fantasy, Emile von Sauer said something like (regarding Gilels playing) he had not heard
anything like it since the death of his master... who was Franz Liszt.

You should listen to Gilels Spanish Rhapsody too.

About Cliburn, I don't agree with the famous quote "Others have played the famous Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto louder and faster, but none have played it with more authority, care and affection than Van Cliburn". His Ravel's Pavan was at one time my reference recording of the work... but I can't confirm continuity on that these days.


----------



## faraway

I hope everybody heard Argerich playing Liszt's Sonata in h-moll. 
By the way, if you want to learn better the personality of this wonderful woman, there is a documentary "Evening Talks with Martha Argerich" which is priceless considering the fact that she gave just a few interviews in her life.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

faraway said:


> I hope everybody heard Argerich playing Liszt's Sonata in h-moll


Do you mean the Piano sonata in b minor?


----------



## MrTortoise

I just finished listening to:










I purchased the CD several months ago but only listened to it a couple of times mainly in the background but this thread inspired me to give it my full attention, and am I ever glad I did! It is a great collection of pieces to show off her technical range and lyricism.

Thanks for reminding me of this recording by starting the thread Rachovsky!


----------



## faraway

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> Do you mean the Piano sonata in b minor?


Exactly  So, you liked it?


----------



## MrTortoise

I enjoyed the Lizst b minor and was impressed with her technique and interpretation. I followed along with the score and it seemed to me she was very careful to follow the directions of Liszt and she did a superb job of pacing and shaping a long and sustained virtuoso work. I'm not that familiar with the Sonata, I think I had only heard it twice before, one recording and one live performance so it it still a rather new work for my ears and I look forward to hearing it again, in this recording and others.


----------



## faraway

Mr Tortoise, glad you enjoyed this sonata!
May I ask you, are you musician? If yes, what is your instrument?

Now let's talk about Martha's interpretations particularities of her playing
that you don't like (if they exist). What about her playing Mozart's Concertos? I think she plays it beautifully, but as if it was romantic music. I sometimes hear Schubert instead of Mozart.


----------



## Rachovsky

Here's a pretty little sonata by Scarlatti that I've always loved to hear her play:






Look at those fingers move.


----------



## Kuhlau

The jury remains out for me on Argerich.

Certainly, I've been impressed by her playing at times. Her version of Tchaikovsky's First Piano Concerto with Abbado and the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra positively sizzles - yet her reading of the same work under Kondrashin with the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra just sounds rushed, IMO. She also hurries too much in Chopin's Second Piano Concerto with Dutoit and the Orchestre Symphonique de Montreal. Then again, she's a keen-eared and suitably sympathetic accompaniest opposite Gidon Kremer in Beethoven's violin sonatas.

Very much a mixed bag for this listener.

FK


----------



## MrTortoise

faraway said:


> Mr Tortoise, glad you enjoyed this sonata!
> May I ask you, are you musician? If yes, what is your instrument?


Well that depends on your definition  I used to play the piano and had a keen interest in composition, however I don't play often these days.


faraway said:


> Now let's talk about Martha's interpretations particularities of her playing
> that you don't like (if they exist). What about her playing Mozart's Concertos? I think she plays it beautifully, but as if it was romantic music. I sometimes hear Schubert instead of Mozart.


I have never heard her play Mozart, in fact I believe I have only heard her play Romantic and later rep.


----------



## Kuhlau

Neglected to mention earlier that Argerich is rather pleasant in Haydn's Eleventh Piano (well, Keyboard) Concerto, but her talents are far better employed in the Shostakovich First Piano Concerto with which the Haydn is paired on DG.

FK


----------



## jhar26

faraway said:


> What about her playing Mozart's Concertos? I think she plays it beautifully, but as if it was romantic music. I sometimes hear Schubert instead of Mozart.


She rarely plays any of the Mozart concertos. The only Mozart concerto of her that I own is a live recording of No.25 which sounds fine to me although Geza Anda is my fave for this concerto. There may be other Argerich/Mozart concerto discs, but I'm not sure and there definitely aren't many. Overall Argerich is my favorite pianist though. I'm aware of the "she hurries too much" criticism of those who don't like her as much as I do, but I find her playing very exciting. But hey, I'm sure that Beethoven didn't mean his "Eroica" symphony to be played as slowly as Otto Klemperer did it either, but I don't mind. It's by far my favorite recording of the work anyway. If it sounds great IT IS great in my opinion.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

faraway said:


> Exactly  So, you liked it?


I do, indeed. I am not new to the work, though. There are many recordings I enjoy, for various reasons: Horowitz, Barere, Fiorentino, Richter, Bolet, Gilels, among others.


----------



## Kuhlau

jhar26 said:


> Overall Argerich is my favorite pianist though. I'm aware of the "she hurries too much" criticism of those who don't like her as much as I do, but I find her playing very exciting.


I genuinely mean to take away nothing of your enthusiasm for Argerich, but to imply as you have done that her speediness is a fault with those whom you claim don't like her playing as much as you do is a little insulting to those of us who can clearly hear when the music is becoming blurred because a pianist is rushing headlong through a performance. There are a great many other pianists who can generate every ounce of the excitement Argerich is capable of producing _*without*_ reducing sections of the music to a slurry of notes. 

FK


----------



## MrTortoise

Kuhlau said:


> The jury remains out for me on Argerich.
> 
> Certainly, I've been impressed by her playing at times. Her version of Tchaikovsky's First Piano Concerto with Abbado and the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra positively sizzles - yet her reading of the same work under Kondrashin with the Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra just sounds rushed, IMO. She also hurries too much in Chopin's Second Piano Concerto with Dutoit and the Orchestre Symphonique de Montreal. Then again, she's a keen-eared and suitably sympathetic accompaniest opposite Gidon Kremer in Beethoven's violin sonatas.
> 
> Very much a mixed bag for this listener.FK


I just listened to Tchaikovsky First with Argerich and Kondrashin, and I agree with you, the performance is on the fast side. 1st movement, it really didn't hamper my enjoyment of the music, nothing was played so fast that I could not enjoy the phrase and flow of the music, and I must say, the way she can play octaves, bravo! I noticed that in the debut recital recording as well. However, her tempo in the fast section of the Andantino prevented me from enjoying all that sticky-sweetness I want to experience when I listen to Tchaikovsky. And that was made even more disappointing given the tenderness with which she played the movement's opening and closing. And the finale was too fast for my taste as well.

So, I can say this is not my favorite recording, she did hurry her way through. On the other hand, I must say that Argerich was perfect as far as tempi (and pretty much all other matters of interpretation) on the debut recital recording. Nothing rushed, well phrased, powerful playing without forced tone or harshness. I recommend you give it a listen. And thanks for mentioning the Kremer/Argerich Beethoven recording. I will look for it.


----------



## jhar26

Kuhlau said:


> I genuinely mean to take away nothing of your enthusiasm for Argerich, but to imply as you have done that her speediness is a fault with those whom you claim don't like her playing as much as you do is a little insulting to those of us who can clearly hear when the music is becoming blurred because a pianist is rushing headlong through a performance. There are a great many other pianists who can generate every ounce of the excitement Argerich is capable of producing _*without*_ reducing sections of the music to a slurry of notes.
> 
> FK


I don't see what's insulting about my post at all, but if you see it that way I apologize. I will stick to "I like/don't like" comments from now on so as not to upset anyone. So let's just say that I like her, but what do I know?


----------



## Kuhlau

Please don't misunderstand me, jhar26. Your remark came across to me as dismissive because I assumed that your preference for Argerich meant you either couldn't or wouldn't hear the 'flaws' others have detected in her artistry. If I was wrong, then the apology should be from me to you. 

FK


----------



## jhar26

MrTortoise said:


> So, I can say this is not my favorite recording, she did hurry her way through. On the other hand, I must say that Argerich was perfect as far as tempi (and pretty much all other matters of interpretation) on the debut recital recording. Nothing rushed, well phrased, powerful playing without forced tone or harshness. I recommend you give it a listen. And thanks for mentioning the Kremer/Argerich Beethoven recording. I will look for it.


These are some of my Argerich faves...

Rachmaninov 3
Prokofiev 3
Chopin Piano Sonata 2
Chopin 24 preludes
Ravel's Gaspard de la Nuit
Chopin's Andante Spianato & Grande Polonaise
Schumann Piano Concerto
Liszt Piano Sonata in B minor
Schumann Fantasiestucke, op.12

...all in my very modest opinion of course.


----------



## Kuhlau

Now you see, I can't immediately leap on your list and say I think you're wrong about the Rachmaninov Third Piano Concerto (with Chailly, right?), because you prefaced everything with: 'These are some of *my* Argerich faves ... '.

Damn you. :angry: 

FK


----------



## jhar26

Kuhlau said:


> Please don't misunderstand me, jhar26. Your remark came across to me as dismissive because I assumed that your preference for Argerich meant you either couldn't or wouldn't hear the 'flaws' others have detected in her artistry. If I was wrong, then the apology should be from me to you.
> 
> FK


I'm aware of the 'flaws' that others have detected in her artistry, and indeed - even I occasionally think that she overdoes it with the fast tempos. Most of the time I find her playing jaw dropping though, and I'm definitely not the only one because there are many perfectly sane people who regard her the greatest living pianist and one of the all time greats.

But I think that most great artists have certain characteristics that some find appealing while others find them annoying. As I said in another post, "Klemperer is too slow, Du Pre too emotional, Karajan too string oriented, Mutter plays with too much vibrato, Heifetz is a cold technician, Martha plays too fast, Callas doesn't sing pretty enough, Kiri sings too pretty at the expense of drama, etc" in the opinion of their critics. While there probably is some truth in those opinions depending on ones taste, those same characteristics (or eccentricities if you prefer) may be appealing to others and contribute to them being fans of those artists.

And no - I definitely didn't mean to insult you. It's not in my character to want to insult anyone here. My ego ain't that big and I respect everyone's opinion, including those opinions I disagree with.


----------



## MrTortoise

Thanks for the list jhar. So much music and so little time!


----------



## jhar26

MrTortoise said:


> Thanks for the list jhar. So much music and so little time!


Yep - that's the frustrating thing about being interested in music.


----------



## jhar26

Kuhlau said:


> Now you see, I can't immediately leap on your list and say I think you're wrong about the Rachmaninov Third Piano Concerto (with Chailly, right?), because you prefaced everything with: 'These are some of *my* Argerich faves ... '.
> 
> Damn you. :angry:
> 
> FK


Well, I always speak for myself only. I seldom have a clue what others will like. I only know what I like myself.

But you better face it my friend, Martha is the only one out there who can play the minute waltz in thirty seconds if she wants.


----------



## Kuhlau

jhar26 said:


> But you better face it my friend, Martha is the only one out there who can play the minute waltz in thirty seconds if she wants.


Do we know if Lang Lang has yet tried? 

FK


----------



## Rachovsky

Kuhlau said:


> Do we know if Lang Lang has yet tried?
> 
> FK


He can make me vomit in under thirty seconds.


----------



## Kuhlau

jhar26 said:


> As I said in another post, "Klemperer is too slow, Du Pre too emotional, Karajan too string oriented, Mutter plays with too much vibrato, Heifetz is a cold technician, Martha plays too fast, Callas doesn't sing pretty enough, Kiri sings too pretty at the expense of drama, etc" in the opinion of their critics.


Great summary. Though I'd say it probably ought to go a little more like this:

"_*Celibidache*_ is too slow, Du Pre too _*idiosyncratic*_, Karajan too _*obsessed with legato*_, Mutter plays with too _*wide a*_ vibrato, _*Mullova*_ is a cold technician, Martha plays too fast, Callas doesn't sing pretty enough, Kiri sings too _*many benefit gigs, thus undermining her credibility as a serious classical music artiste*_, etc" ...

(C'mon, now you _know_ I'm kidding, right?)

FK


----------



## Kuhlau

Rachovsky said:


> He can make me vomit in under thirty seconds.


It takes you _that_ long? 

FK


----------



## jhar26

Kuhlau said:


> Great summary. Though I'd say it probably ought to go a little more like this:
> 
> "_*Celibidache*_ is too slow, Du Pre too _*idiosyncratic*_, Karajan too _*obsessed with legato*_, Mutter plays with too _*wide a*_ vibrato, _*Mullova*_ is a cold technician, Martha plays too fast, Callas doesn't sing pretty enough, Kiri sings too _*many benefit gigs, thus undermining her credibility as a serious classical music artiste*_, etc" ...
> 
> (C'mon, now you _know_ I'm kidding, right?)
> 
> FK


I hope so.


----------



## jhar26

Rachovsky said:


> He can make me vomit in under thirty seconds.


That will come in handy a couple of days from now when you've had a few too many and you're trying to recover from that hangover.


----------



## faraway

> Here's a pretty little sonata by Scarlatti that I've always loved to hear her play:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at those fingers move.


I liked it very much. There is another work where I like her repeated notes very much: Tarantella from 2nd Suite of Rachmaninov. Surprisingly, I prefer the version with Brigitte Meyer more than the famous one with Nelson Freire.








> I have never heard her play Mozart, in fact I believe I have only heard her play Romantic and later rep.


2nd mouvement of Mozart Concerto n.20 K.466. I think, it sounds romantic 








> But hey, I'm sure that Beethoven didn't mean his "Eroica" symphony to be played as slowly as Otto Klemperer did it either, but I don't mind. It's by far my favorite recording of the work anyway. If it sounds great IT IS great in my opinion.


Yes, it's great in it's own way. 
When you say "If it sounds great IT IS great in my opinion", you're quite right. But the music sounds differently to everybody, so, WHAT sounds great? (here I don't talk about Argerich or Klemperer, but in general).
Me I also like the intellectual aspect in music. I like when it sounds beautifully, but I like it more when it's also thought out. Argerich plays beautifully, the music comes from her heart, yes, I can hear it. But in classical repertoire (and sometimes in Bach), I can't say that she really THINKS about what she is doingI mean about the structure and what I call "intellectual aspect" 
I know, once after a successful recital, a listener asked her "Why you play it like that?" She says: " I don't know, I just play it as I hear it." That is probably what makes her so good in romantic repertoire...



> I do, indeed. I am not new to the work, though. There are many recordings I enjoy, for various reasons: Horowitz, Barere, Fiorentino, Richter, Bolet, Gilels, among others.


What you like in recording of Hrowitz, just interesting?


----------



## Rachovsky

jhar26 said:


> That will come in handy a couple of days from now when you've had a few too many and you're trying to recover from that hangover.


Well the only way I could listen to Lang Lang is if I were tipsy. I actually think he has a great technical skills (with Rach 3 for instance..*Third Movement*), but I feel embarrassed just watching him on YouTube...



faraway said:


> I liked it very much. There is another work where I like her repeated notes very much: Tarantella from 2nd Suite of Rachmaninov. Surprisingly, I prefer the version with Brigitte Meyer more than the famous one with Nelson Freire.


Well I may just have to give this entire suite a listen. I'd never heard of this piece so I'll try it out when I have time. What a beauty Miss Argerich is there as well, lol. The Waltz sounds particularly nice at a glance as well.


----------



## jhar26

Rachovsky said:


> Well the only way I could listen to Lang Lang is if I were tipsy. I actually think he has a great technical skills (with Rach 3 for instance..*Third Movement*), but I feel embarrassed just watching him on YouTube...


 He looks as though he's a bit tipsy himself. You'd expect him to jump to his feat, take of that jacket and get into "Great Balls of Fire" or "Whole Lotta Shakin' Going On" instead.


----------



## faraway

Rachovsky said:


> I'd never heard of this piece so I'll try it out when I have time. What a beauty Miss Argerich is there as well, lol.


Of course, she is! This thread is about her.
Sorry, I just write fast.

About Lang Lang. 
I thought before that everything he does on the scene is pure acting. But now don't know. What if that's his real nature: being simple, expressive, to show what he feels without thinking about what people may think. 
For me now it's a great dilemma:
Sv. Richter said that the face and the body of a musician express the work that he does playing music and that it's not really necessary to look at the pianist (we know that he liked to turn off light in concert halls while he was playing). So, for him, if it is a real and not fake expression, it's ok, whatever it is. 
On the other hand there are Zimmerman, Pogorelic and many others who work on their expressions, control them and make them part of the show. The personality means a lot in music, we know it.
So, what do you think about these opinions. What to do and what not to do?

I remember my first piano teacher who said to me that when the pianist moves too much and has many facial expressions, it means that he lacks the ability to LISTEN and HEAR and tries (unconsciously) to compensate it with mouvements.


----------



## YsayeOp.27#6

faraway said:


> I remember my first piano teacher who said to me that when the pianist moves too much and has many facial expressions, it means that he lacks the ability to LISTEN and HEAR and tries (unconsciously) to compensate it with mouvements.


But we all realize how wrong those postulates are as soon as we think in András Schiff, Alfred Brendel and André Watts.


----------



## Rondo

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> But we all realize how wrong those postulates are as soon as we think in András Schiff, Alfred Brendel and André Watts.


Brendel is one of the most expressive _and_ one of the best. Most of the great pianists I've heard/seen, with an exception of perhaps Kempf and Barenboim, are pretty expressive.


----------



## faraway

YsayeOp.27#6 said:


> But we all realize how wrong those postulates are as soon as we think in András Schiff, Alfred Brendel and André Watts.





> Brendel is one of the most expressive and one of the best. Most of the great pianists I've heard/seen, with an exception of perhaps Kempf and Barenboim, are pretty expressive.


I think I realised one big mistake that I made using the word "expression" when I was trying to cite my teacher, my apologise to you, (to my teacher too  There is a difference between the expression that is conscious and something like a tic. Me, for example, I have a tic: when I play, I follow the rythm moving slightly my head, "beating". That's not really an artistic expression but more a "tic". I think a lot of musicians have both.
As for me, Brendel doesn't have "tics", Lang Lang, a lot, Argerich, just a bit, like rearranging her hair twenty times during the concert (kidding


----------



## jhar26

How about Mitsuko Uchida? I love her, but she seems to die a thousand deaths when she's playing.


----------



## danae

There is also a Scarlatti sonata with Argerich on YouTube, which is also exceptional. 
But I do have a recording of the Rachmaninof 3rd with Kyril Kondrashin (I don't which orchestra), where Argerich plays so fast that there points where the orchestra can't keep up! I'll check the CD for details later.


----------



## mueske

I generally don't like her interpretations, but I haven't heard that many. Actually, let me rephrase, I don't like her Rachmaninoff interpretations, it's too fast for my liking, a lot of the notes get lost in her tremendous speed at times.

I aslo can't feel her Rachmaninoff, the emotions don't fit Rachmaninoff, she'd do much beter on a Prokofiev piece I would think. And coincidence comes, apparently her Prokofiev's 3rd piano concerto is amazing, or at least if I believe you people, but I don't have a reason not to, so I'll believe you.


----------



## Air

Rondo said:


> Brendel is one of the most expressive _and_ one of the best. Most of the great pianists I've heard/seen, with an exception of perhaps Kempf and Barenboim, are pretty expressive.


Have you ever seen Kempf play in his prime? It's just like how people insult the 88-year-old Rubinstein on Youtube. It's disgusting. I can't imagine what they'll be like when they're 88.


----------



## Air

airad2 said:


> Have you ever seen Kempf play in his prime? It's just like how people insult the 88-year-old Rubinstein on Youtube. It's disgusting. I can't imagine what they'll be like when they're 88.


Hah, but Rubinstein at 88 is more expressive than other.


----------



## shsherm

I attended a performance by Martha Argerich the other night with the LA Phil where she played The Ravel Piano Concerto In G-Muscular beefy hands and forearms which appear to flail at the keyboard but miraculous sounds emerge. She then played a duet with the young conductor Yannick Nezet-Seguin.


----------



## JTech82

She's no doubt a virtuoso, but her playing lacks a certain introspection that I find is important in music. You can be technically brilliant, but if you don't know how to hold back once in a while your playing looses a lot of those idiosyncrasies that make say someone like Ravel such a compelling composer. She does fine with Prokofiev and the more bombastic material, but I find her Ravel a bit too much.


----------



## Air

JTech82 said:


> She's no doubt a virtuoso, but her playing lacks a certain introspection that I find is important in music. You can be technically brilliant, but if you don't know how to hold back once in a while your playing looses a lot of those idiosyncrasies that make say someone like Ravel such a compelling composer. She does fine with Prokofiev and the more bombastic material, but I find her Ravel a bit too much.


Then you've never heard her or her Ravel.


----------



## JTech82

airad2 said:


> Then you've never heard her or her Ravel.


Whatever. I've heard plenty of her piano concertos including the Ravel. Like I said, she's technically gifted, but not very introspective when the music calls for it.


----------



## jhar26

No musician, singer or composer - no matter how great - is liked by everyone. Sometimes it's just a matter of 'different strokes for different folks.' Argerich is no doubt an all time great, as are Rubinstein, Horowitz, Gilels, Richter and quite a few others. All these people's versions of the same works are somewhat different from one another, which is a good thing. If there was only one way to do it each work would only needed to be recorded one time and we'd be done. But different isn't always wrong - it's what keeps us listening.


----------



## Clancy

I'm glad to see a thriving discussion about one of the few classical musicians I'm actually familiar with. 

I have got her debut recital and I guess my response is similar to many others; she is very fast but there is still a beautiful quality to her playing which has stayed with me.

Has she ever performed any Debussy? That would make for an interesting combination, I think; she gives a sort of ethereal quality to her music which I would like to hear mated to Debussy's "colourful" approach.


----------



## JTech82

jhar26 said:


> No musician, singer or composer - no matter how great - is liked by everyone. Sometimes it's just a matter of 'different strokes for different folks.' Argerich is no doubt an all time great, as are Rubinstein, Horowitz, Gilels, Richter and quite a few others. All these people's versions of the same works are somewhat different from one another, which is a good thing. If there was only one way to do it each work would only needed to be recorded one time and we'd be done. But different isn't always wrong - it's what keeps us listening.


Perhaps I'm being a little tough here in my analysis of her. I need to go back and listen to some recordings.


----------



## jhar26

JTech82 said:


> Perhaps I'm being a little tough here in my analysis of her. I need to go back and listen to some recordings.


Besides the concertos some of the solo recordings I enjoy most of her include the music of Chopin and Schumann, but I don't know if those composers rank with your faves. But since you love Ravel's music maybe her _Gaspard de la Nuit_ disc might be one you'd enjoy. I seldom see this LP/CD mentionned by other Argerich fans, but it's one of my faves.










I wouldn't hold it against you if you wouldn't like it or her though. Like I said, different people respond differently to different artists, I have no problem accepting that. It doesn't change how often I've been and continue to be excited and moved by her playing myself.


----------



## JTech82

I'm about to give this one another whirl:


----------



## xJuanx

JTech82 said:


> I'm about to give this one another whirl:


Without doubt one of her most iconic albums. I'll never get tired of listen to it


----------



## lovekieu

i love, too


----------



## Air

> I'm glad to see a thriving discussion about one of the few classical musicians I'm actually familiar with.
> 
> I have got her debut recital and I guess my response is similar to many others; she is very fast but there is still a beautiful quality to her playing which has stayed with me.
> 
> Has she ever performed any Debussy? That would make for an interesting combination, I think; she gives a sort of ethereal quality to her music which I would like to hear mated to Debussy's "colourful" approach.


http://www.argerich.org/Recordings.htm


----------



## Aramis

I got her Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff racord. Not that I can really see why she's so great, it's just nice to listen something with knowledge that it was played by someone pretty.


----------



## Aramis

Anyone knows if she has official website? I'm about to buy ticket for her concert in Warsaw, but I can't find any precise informations at organizer's page.


----------



## kg4fxg

*The Movie........*



jhar26 said:


> Let's face it: The woman is a Goddess.


Yes, she is some Goddess. I really enjoyed the DVD movie interview with her. I also bought one on Hilary Hahn at the same time. Both are excellent.

I understand Martha is a bit of a recluse and rarely gives interviews. I have not read much about her but enjoy the music.

I can't critic her music here like some others. I really am not in a position to as I would need more knowledge about her repertoire compared with others. It is also interesting that there are some pieces that moved her so much she will never play them. So she said in the DVD.

Personally speaking I think she is absolutely beautiful, I love that grey hair. I guess I am getting old. I would love to have dinner with her and then attend one of her concerts.

I figured out how to convert the DVD to my iTouch iPod and enjoy watching it there. She is a women of much mystery. I need to find a good book about her......


----------



## jhar26

Aramis said:


> Anyone knows if she has official website? I'm about to buy ticket for her concert in Warsaw, but I can't find any precise informations at organizer's page.


To me knowledge there is no official website. This is the best Argerich website, but it's not official.

http://www.argerich.org/index.htm


----------



## Aramis

I saw it before, there is no tour information. But tanks.

I guess I'll be there anyway, even if only sure thing about the concert is that shes going to perform there something.


----------



## jhar26

kg4fxg said:


> Yes, she is some Goddess. I really enjoyed the DVD movie interview with her. I also bought one on Hilary Hahn at the same time. Both are excellent.
> 
> I understand Martha is a bit of a recluse and rarely gives interviews. I have not read much about her but enjoy the music.
> 
> I can't critic her music here like some others. I really am not in a position to as I would need more knowledge about her repertoire compared with others. It is also interesting that there are some pieces that moved her so much she will never play them. So she said in the DVD.
> 
> Personally speaking I think she is absolutely beautiful, I love that grey hair. I guess I am getting old. I would love to have dinner with her and then attend one of her concerts.
> 
> I figured out how to convert the DVD to my iTouch iPod and enjoy watching it there. She is a women of much mystery. I need to find a good book about her......


I don't think there is a biography out there, but awhile ago I read at a Argerich forum that there is one being written as we speak...so we can only hope. I love that DVD also. She's a strong woman, but she also seems very nice. I think she's adorable really. And I agree - PLEASE Martha, NEVER cut that hair. 

As for negative comments about her playing, well, give me the name of one musician, conductor or composer who is liked by everyone. There is no such thing. All I know is that she's important to me and that her playing moves me. If others disagree - no problem, let them listen to whoever rocks their world.


----------



## kg4fxg

*Thanks*



jhar26 said:


> I don't think there is a biography out there, but awhile ago I read at a Argerich forum that there is one being written as we speak...so we can only hope. I love that DVD also. She's a strong woman, but she also seems very nice. I think she's adorable really. And I agree - PLEASE Martha, NEVER cut that hair.
> 
> As for negative comments about her playing, well, give me the name of one musician, conductor or composer who is liked by everyone. There is no such thing. All I know is that she's important to me and that her playing moves me. If others disagree - no problem, let them listen to whoever rocks their world.


Jhar26 - Thanks

I can only find bits and pieces of her in other books. Yes, we can only hope a book will soon emerge. That DVD does show some of her personality, she really seems like a very nice person. Makes you want to run up to her and hug her and thank her for her beautiful playing.

I spent last night listening to her Ravel pieces. Just amazing. I am so glad and so privileged to be a fan of hers.


----------



## jhar26

kg4fxg said:


> she really seems like a very nice person. Makes you want to run up to her and hug her and thank her for her beautiful playing.
> 
> I am so glad and so privileged to be a fan of hers.


Same here.


----------



## kg4fxg

*So how do you know so much about Martha?*

I am amazed at your knowledge about Martha, how do you come by it? Yes, I wish there was a book about her.

I don't understand it, but I find her so mysterious, maybe that is the attraction? I guess the more I learn of her unusual habits the more fascinated I am with her.

I understand she was married three times. I wonder if she has a good relationship with her three daughters? I think she had a daughter with each husband.


----------



## jhar26

kg4fxg said:


> I am amazed at your knowledge about Martha, how do you come by it? Yes, I wish there was a book about her.
> 
> I don't understand it, but I find her so mysterious, maybe that is the attraction? I guess the more I learn of her unusual habits the more fascinated I am with her.
> 
> I understand she was married three times. I wonder if she has a good relationship with her three daughters? I think she had a daughter with each husband.


Yes, that's right. Martha is a hard woman to know though because she's so private, but you pick up little things here and there. You're right about her being so mysterious and that being part of the attraction. She seems to be a nice person though and I adore her.


----------



## Aramis

Did anyone read Olivier Bellamy's book about her? There is new release here and I wonder if I should buy it.


----------



## jhar26

Aramis said:


> Did anyone read Olivier Bellamy's book about her? There is new release here and I wonder if I should buy it.


It's said to be poorly written, but if there was an English language release I would buy it. My French is not good enough to read books without having to look up stuff in a dictionary every 20 seconds or so.


----------



## Ravellian

Ahh... Argerich. One of the last truly great fiery and passionate romantic pianists from 1 or 2 generations ago. Her playing of Chopin and Ravel I have found particularly exquisite. Her Tchaikovsky and Rach 2 I have found unpleasantly fast.


----------



## Air

Ravellian said:


> Ahh... Argerich. One of the last truly great fiery and passionate romantic pianists from 1 or 2 generations ago... Her Tchaikovsky and Rach 2(Rach 3, you mean?) I have found unpleasantly fast.[/I]


Yeah, but they're certainly "fiery and passionate".


----------



## Albert7

I really dig her piano playing so much. I want to get her box sets.


----------



## Ajayay

Yes yes yes! And Ondine in her hands is marvellous! It almost had me wondering if it needs to be a woman playing that piece in order to bring out its gentle, slightly seductive and hallucinatory quality. Probably not but she mesmerised me with it!


----------



## Albert7

Ajayay said:


> Yes yes yes! And Ondine in her hands is marvellous! It almost had me wondering if it needs to be a woman playing that piece in order to bring out its gentle, slightly seductive and hallucinatory quality. Probably not but she mesmerised me with it!


Ravishing most indeed! So much that I have to pen up an Argerich haiku just for her:

Touching hands
Upon lightning silver keyboard
Elemental touches.


----------



## CDs

Listening to her play Prokofiev Piano Concerto # 3 for the first time. All I can say is Wow!


----------



## Merl

She's not bad.... Although I'm a big Bobby Crush and Richard Clayderman fan, myself. :devil:


----------



## Guest

She can be a hurricane, and there are some recordings she has made which are utterly mesmerizing. But sometimes, it seems to me, she lacks subtlety. I have virtually all of her records, but often consider them a striking alternative rather than a favorite. I recently listened to a a recording of the two piano version of Brahms' Haydn variations (from Lugano) and it was a miracle.


----------



## Ras

*A new Argerich box from WARNER coming out September 21, 2018.

ARGERICH, MARTHA The Lugano Recordings. Works by Schumann, Mozart, Ravel, Beethoven, Rachmaninov, Brahms, Shostakovich etc. Warner Classics 22cds.*


----------



## Ras

*Martha Argerich*' recording on EMI of *Chopin's piano concertos* with *Charles Dutoit* conducting is my favorite.


----------



## Guest

Ras said:


> *A new Argerich box from WARNER coming out September 21, 2018.
> 
> ARGERICH, MARTHA The Lugano Recordings. Works by Schumann, Mozart, Ravel, Beethoven, Rachmaninov, Brahms, Shostakovich etc. Warner Classics 22cds.*
> 
> View attachment 107498


I think they may have done it, compiled another Argerich box I must have. I have to check it doesn't overlap too much with the Lugano recordings that got included in the previously issued EMI boxes.


----------



## DavidA

Ras said:


> *Martha Argerich*' recording on EMI of *Chopin's piano concertos* with *Charles Dutoit* conducting is my favorite.


The live performance of no 1 at Lugano is even better


----------



## Ras

DavidA said:


> The live performance of no 1 at Lugano is even better


*Thanks DavidA* - I will try to find it on Spotify!


----------



## DavidA

Ravellian said:


> Ahh... Argerich. One of the last truly great fiery and passionate romantic pianists from 1 or 2 generations ago. Her playing of Chopin and Ravel I have found particularly exquisite. Her Tchaikovsky and Rach 2 I have found unpleasantly fast.


There are actually three recordings of the Tchaikovsky. The first with Dutoit is fairly broad in its tempi but the second with Kondrashin is incredibly fast. A real white knuckle ride! The third with Abbado is about in-between. I didn't know she had recorded the Rach 2?


----------



## Rogerx

*Happy Birthday*



1941 Martha Argerich, pianist (debut 1949)


----------



## Animal the Drummer

I was listening to her stunning Bach solo recital on DG from the late 70s just last night. Has there ever been a more triumphantly successful example of "casting against type" in a classical recording? I wish she'd give us more of his music.


----------



## flamencosketches

Animal the Drummer said:


> I was listening to her stunning Bach solo recital on DG from the late 70s just last night. Has there ever been a more triumphantly successful example of "casting against type" in a classical recording? I wish she'd give us more of his music.


Her Bach CD is killer, and it's actually where it all started for me in terms of my fandom for her. I was a big Gould fan when I heard Argerich's Bach (at my girlfriend's suggestion) and I was amazed that this music could be played so differently than Gould and still be totally successful, and totally Bach. It then caught me off guard that when I heard her Chopin Preludes recording I liked it even better (knowing nothing of Chopin at the time). The rest is history...

We listened to her phenomenal Rachmaninov 3 & Tchaikovsky 1 concertos CD on Philips while driving through the Blue Ridge Mountains yesterday, what a disc!! One for the books.










Martha is still one of my favorite pianists. I hope to see her in concert in my lifetime, unlikely though it may be (she just turned 79, and we're living through a pandemic with no end in sight). I wish she still gave solo recitals.


----------

