Truly sublime. I've heard the piece hundreds of times by now -- all wonderfully solid, highly competent performances, some more exciting than others but all remarkable. THIS, however, breaks new ground. I've never heard the long lyrical passages played with such tenderness, such sensitivity, such an incredible degree of refinement -- such DEPTH. There was no way I could have interrupted this performance, even if my life had depended on it. No pianist -- not even Horowitz in his prime or Novaes in hers -- ever played with a greater variety of tone colors, contrasting dynamic levels and CONTROL than Pletnev. And of course all the death defying virtuosic passages were played with such power, such refinement and such brilliant articulation as to make others seem clumsy and dull-witted, if hardly inept. Surely Pletnev is one of the very greatest -- and most INTERESTING -- pianists who ever lived!
+Hyramess Hiramess Inderdaad een grote meester. De meeste zogenaamde pianisten weten niet hoe ze Liszt moeten spelen. Juist en vooral omdat ze niet begrijpen wat ze spelen. Ik zie dit ook als een grote meester
Some critics dont like this performance, preferring instead Pletnevs later account on Deutsche Grammaphone.They are incompetent.This performance is right up there with Richter, Argerich and Horowitz.superb feeling, tehnique, vivid imagination and countless expressive insights.One of the greatest accounts this wotk has ever known.
Indeed! I cou;en't agree more. Pletnev's extraordinary greatness is under appreciated. He is one of the very greatest masters of the instrument who ever lived.
It's way better than Horivitz. Pletnev uses the dynamics to portray his ideas on the structure and musical germination of the piece, instead of just bashing the hell out of everything.He has intellect. Horovitz doesn't.
Credo che quello che qua è stato definito come " bizzarria " da alcuni commentatori sia invece la volontà ferrea di interpretare più in senso analitico- orchestrale che pianistico il testo, sommo, di Liszt... Non solo, certa secchezza ed asciuttezza timbrica ( ma sempre capziosa e delibata più che arbitraria, non tipo Pogorelich quindi, e tra l' altro da sempre appartenente a Pletnev...) denoti anche la volontà di guardare a questa Sonata secondo la prospettiva ascetica e turbata dell' ultimo Liszt, con una certa interessante audacia di intenti... Io preferisco sempre un taglio più schiettamente faustiano e visionario, oltre che futuribile, tuttavia questa del " giovane" Pletnev fu quantomeno una proposta coerente e diversa dalla " tradizione".
the sheet music William Kapell used is the Paragon edition edited by a Brazilian virtuoso named Vytatus Bacevitious.I love Liszts transcendental etudes.arrau gets rave revirews for his performance of them.I wish Pletnev would record all 12 of them.
I have the Mephisto Waltz by both Kapell and Trifonov on my youtube channel (I believe) I have a DVD with Yundi Li playing the 4 Chopin Scherzos and Liszt B minor Sonata which I really like very much.You must get the DVD entitled "Great Pianists of the Bell Telephone Hour".Arrau plays Beethovens Emperor Concerto, Byron Janis the Rach 3 and Van Cliburn the Brahms 2., with lots of other great pianists and performances all in color with good sound quality.
I'm glad you like this performance. I totally agree. This performance is magnificent and unique but I still believe that Arrau treats the work with more passion and emotion. The way he plays the "Grandioso" in the first part is breathtaking. I tried to watch the video of the Mephisto Waltz by Kapell but sadly it is not available in my country. However, I will buy it because I am very interested in the way he plays the work. He is truly magnificent.
I've only heard ONE other version that can even BEGIN to spare with this, and that is Evgeny Kissin's masterful rendition, BUT Kissing does not have either the passion or the vivid imagination displayed here by Pletnev who is certainly ranks very high among the greatest virtuosi who ever lived. Pletnve is like Horowitz on speed. His technical prowess far exceeds that of the better known legendary Horowitz. This playing is highly PERSONAL in nature which makes it remarkable INDIVIDUALISTIC. Some have found that troubling. I find it completely AWE-INSPIRING. There are many brilliant, tasteful, wonderfully controlled recorded performances of this sonata, but Pletnev's consummate mastery and deep emotional commitment make most of them seem, pedestrian in comparison.
Listen to Danil Trifonov on my channel play the Mephisto Waltz live from the Artur Rubinstein Competition.The version Kapell is playing is edited by Vytatus Basevichius.If arrau plays the Liszt Sonata slowly I wont like it.I just bought Horowitz 1977 recording which is superb.My first hearing of the Liszt B minor Sonata was with Malcuzinsky who takes 45 minutes.I always fell asleep and considered it one of Liszts lesser works until I heard Horowitz.
I know Daniil's performance you mentioned. It is a very interesting and colourful version with some dazzling moments but it sounds too delicate for the Mephisto waltz, in my opinion. I don't think he really does the story justice, nevertheless his technique is incredible. Arrau takes about half an hour with the Liszt Sonata. It is definitely worth listening. I haven't heard Malcuzinsky with the Liszt Sonata yet. I will look for it.
I just listend to Kapell playing the Mephisto Waltz. It is a stunning performance full of unique vividness and energy without sounding violent. I noticed he has beautiful technique and especially very keen sense of style and expression. His playing has splendid naturalness. Do you know what version he is playing? I didn't hear that before. I would love to hear Janis playing Rach 3. Pletnev's live performance on the RU-vid is astonishing,especially the cadenza.
Definitely a very interesting interpretation, but I hear no reason for hero worship. Some parts are stirring and memorable, others are wilful and bizarre almost to the point of being unendurable. Pogorelich is the same mixed bag.
To compare this to the 50+ minute version of Pogorelich which really had little merit due to the very extreme tempo changes (from horribly slow to extremely fast) is absolutely unfair. I Mean, I am practising this piece and my practise tempo is 70 minutes to play through the whole piece ... lmao
look, the Pogorelich version, I get what he did in a way, but he took everything to the absolute extreme. A Slower tempo for the slow parts does sound pretty good and in places (where Pletnev chose them) a faster more staccato play style does have merit, but he also took that to an extreme compared to the rest of his playing and then it feels out of place.
Pletnev does mess with the rhythms of everything that he plays. Sometimes it improves the work, but in this case it is too much. Liszt doesn't need any experimentation of this kind.
Actually many parts... Very arbitrary, too often virtually stopping the music's flow. Manipulating as if he did not trust Liszt's score. Very hard to listen to.
