# What to believe?



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

http://www.richardkastle.com/Home_Page.php

I had heard of this guy before on some youtube videos, people were claiming he is the greatest piano virtuoso ever. Talking down on other great pianists (Cziffra, Hamelin, Horowitz) saying they 'cheat' when playing the ending of Liszt's Hungarion rhapsody no. 2. I didn't take it seriously.

Today I stumbled on him again... Now I want to find out how much of him, and his crazy fans I can believe.

He uses 'neuroscience' to back him up. Claiming that he has "developed white matter that keeps the information moving through the memory prediction framework in the neocortex"; which basicly means he can 'see' patterns.

Considering I have no clue about playing the piano; or the technicalities of music, and only a small understanding regarding neuroscience (will change next year though!) I have no idea what to think of it. The fact that he (Richard Kastle) looks like a rockstar from the 80's, makes me believe he just wants attention with these claims, though you never know.

Do other pianist really 'cheat' as he claims? (http://www.richardkastle.com/Evidentiary_page.html) and does he really play it accurately (



) and like it 'supposed' to be played?

Read a few things on the site, listen to his performance of the second Hungarion rhapsody and tell us what you think..?


----------



## LvB (Nov 21, 2008)

It's marketing. From the evidence, he's a very good technician and competent musician who is looking for a gimmick upon which to sell himself.* There are so many superb technicians out there that it's hard to stand out, so you need a hype-hook, and his consists of running down previous performers, thereby suggesting that if you haven't heard the music played _his_ way you haven't heard it at all. This is nonsense, as are the claims about other players faking the music.

More of his actual qualities as a performer can be discerned in the Chopin Op. 53 Polonaise. The recording reveals him to be a solid player with little or nothing to make him stand out (compare his version to that of Josef Lhevinne, for example, and you'll hear the difference between a supervirtuoso with something unique to say and an ordinary supertechnician, so to speak). I wouldn't write him off altogether, but I'd need to hear him performing much more music of real substance before I'd consider him worth buying a CD for, and I didn't hear anything in these recordings which would make me go out of my way to hear more.

*= Though the evidence, being strictly recorded, is itself ambiguous; technology nowadays allows so much fudging that it's not even completely clear that he is truly _playing_ the music. Being basically trusting, I assume that he is, but....


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

There are several fakes and idiots arround music, longing for some spotlight, and what better way to get it rather than attacking everything. Google Nella Anfuso, Andrea Lucchesi, and you'll find similar things...


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

So there is nothing true of what he says about the ending of H R 2? That others cannot play it like it is supposed to be played?


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

mueske said:


> So there is nothing true of what he says about the ending of H R 2? That others cannot play it like it is supposed to be played?


Well, I really don't know about this. I vever gave any care for this piece, it is pure virtuosistic crap. So even if it is true (and it may really be), who cares? There is much more in music than virtuosism and even more, there are in modern repertoire far tougher pieces than this.


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

bdelykleon said:


> Well, I really don't know about this. I vever gave any care for this piece, it is pure virtuosistic crap. So even if it is true (and it may really be), who cares? There is much more in music than virtuosism and even more, there are in modern repertoire far tougher pieces than this.


When he started dissing Rachmaninoff, I started caring!


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

mueske said:


> When he started dissing Rachmaninoff, I started caring!


Why so? Rachmaninoff famously simplified his own works...


----------



## mueske (Jan 14, 2009)

bdelykleon said:


> Why so? Rachmaninoff famously simplified his own works...


If you mean making cuts to get them to fit on the old records, than yes - otherwise I have no idea what you are talking about?


----------



## bdelykleon (May 21, 2009)

mueske said:


> If you mean making cuts to get them to fit on the old records, than yes - otherwise I have no idea what you are talking about?


The third concerto is severely cut in his recording. I don't know if it was to fit into old records, because there were recordings of every genre with several sides, and actually RCA complained about the length of the concerto, so Rach did that on purpose. And anyway, he uses the easy ossia passages.


----------



## LvB (Nov 21, 2008)

bdelykleon said:


> The third concerto is severely cut in his recording. I don't know if it was to fit into old records, because there were recordings of every genre with several sides, and actually RCA complained about the length of the concerto, so Rach did that on purpose. And anyway, he uses the easy ossia passages.


As you say, RCA wanted cuts, and Rachmaninoff made them. One can argue that he should not have done this, but under the technological circumstances he had no other choice if he wanted a recording made. Most longer pieces were cut to one degree or another in the era of 78s. But as to the _ossia_ passages in the 3rd concerto: Rachmaninoff really used only one major one, and it is certainly not "easy". Rather, he replaced the heavier chordal passage in the cadenza with one which involved more passagework but was lighter in texture, as he felt that the earlier material was out of balance with what had preceded it. Most pianists have followed his lead, though some (Lazar Berman, e.g.) have recorded the more thunderous cadenza. It was/is an aesthetic decision, not one based on Rachmaninoff's inability to perform his own music.


----------

