I met him in 1974 in Los Angeles. What a gentle and kind man he was. Worked with many of his students in Los Angeles Studios. I remember they put out a session call forGreg Piatagorsky. Knowing his students were playing, he showed up. Was very very kind and what a great artist!
Perhaps those who complain should seek out his full recording of the work. They'll hear something entirely different. He had a time constraint on the show, and I don't imagine he was happy about the editing. The conductor is Donald Voorhees, who was with the show for its entire 28 year run on radio and TV. Mr. Piatigorsky's wife Jacqueline is still with us and will be (hopefully) be celebrating her 100th birthday in November.
For all you Monday morning quarterbacks who are complaining: Go pick up your cellos and convince us that you know more about playing than this man! The world pronounced him one of the all-time greats, and frankly I agree wholeheartedly!
I wouldn't define his interpretation "less expressive". I think that he is more restrained (physically), but that is exactly the way how his true profound emotions are heard even more accentuated. Bravo for this wonderful performance and thanks for uploading.
You're very welcome. If you haven't noticed yet, I am actually a violinist. However, three of the violin DVDs I have contain footage with Piatigorsky. I also have a DVD of Rostropovich and Richter but I can't seem to rip it (lpcm format). If I ever figure it out, I'll post more stuff in the future.
The cello Piatigorsky is playing is the 1714 Batta Stradivari. How much the hair on a bow is tightened is a matter of personal taste. It would also depend on how stiff or flexable the wood was.
Piatigorsky didn't miss any notes. What you have to remember is that this video is from an old television tape (circa 1957). The recording technology of color television was very poor then, with a low frame-rate, and audio suffered from this. The film literally couldn't keep up with Piatagorsky's playing, which is why many of the notes in the virtuostic passages appear to be missed or brief.
I think you meant to say: "I don't like it, it's too fast." Or: "I don't care about anything but the tempo and that's why I don't like this performance." Or: "My ears cannot hear anything beyond speed of music and therefore I should say how much I am disappointed in Piatigorsky." Or finally: "As one of the 90% of RU-vid listeners who all dislike this performance because he plays faster than my teacher told me to play, I will have to say I dislike this performance." Need I go on?
What I can't believe is all the numbskulls who disliked this performance by one of the greatest artists who ever walked the planet. I was fortunate to have studied with him. Indeed, one of his students, Nathaniel Rosen, won the Tchaikovsky gold medal in 1978 and the two most recent winners studied with Piatigorsky's students. And as to the cuts, this was made for TV. In order to make it fit within TV time requirements, it was edited. That was not Piatigorsky's choice, it was the director's.
i agree with YTMO21807, the beginning does seem rather cold and rigid...but only for the first 20 seconds, at which point it gains all the warmth it needs.
I have a full DVD of Rostropovitch playing Sonatas with Richter (piano). Unfortunately, I am having trouble ripping it because of the unknown lpcm format. If I ever figure it out, I will be sure to post it, not to mention the other 5 DVDs I have gathering dust.
i play this piece for my final exam this year but i could never play it as fast as he does, it's just not human. he must be very good to be able to play it like that!!
Not to hate on the guy, but I do think that a slower, more emotional and romantic interpretation does the piece more justice. At the same time, it is his interpretation, and this is something to respect at least.
Try to watch the EMI DVD Archive Series featuring Piatgorsky playing Walton´s Cello concert. Wonderful. And also Piatigorsky-Heifetz and friends playing Cesar Franck´s quintet. The most musical interpretation of all (mono)
I wish I could play the elegie this fast! He's running upwards of 100 per eight note, and I can only manage about 76. Absolutely amazing. And such clean playing, too.
This was recorded for television a very long time ago. Thus there are some cuts, and a loud crack in the middle. It was most likely live. Any other recording probably is not. Please take this into consideration.
i loved this version. the slides are pefect. although it does seem a bit held back like as if he feels the saddness of the elegy yet is holding back a little
Although I must agree that I highly enjoy this piece at a slower tempi, I must DISagree and state that yes, he might have taken it a bit quicker, but it lacks no emotion. Piatigorsky is so wonderful to watch. So much more expressive than some of the other male cellists of his time. Gorgeous.
@germantel I'm not sure this is true for strings. If that were the case, I could play with a bow with one horse hair and it would produce the same sound as 1000 hairs (or w/e there is supposed to be). Whenever my bow loses enough hair, I need to get it rehaired - no argument there. Also, consider the multiple elements of good "sound." Even if you were right about volume of sound not increasing, you haven't considered the quality of sound that is highly affected by surface area.
I also prefer the piano accompaniment, which I know well and get a chance to play occasionally. One of my favorite recordings of this is by Reiner Hochmuth.
All of the critics here should jump in a lake unless they can do a better job playing this piece. Too many music critics troll around to try to demonstrate how sophisticated they are when in reality they don't know a violin from a krumhorn. This piece was amazingly performed by a great master!
Piatigorsky does not rush... He plays how he wants to play, which all great musicians do. Just enjoy or not enjoy it as you see fit. Anyways, rhythm is always relative and there is no such thing as absolute in real art.
Man, listen to that portamento at 13/14 seconds in... it's so beautiful... I wish he did even more of it throughout the piece. I seriously get angry when cellists don't use portamento in pieces like this. Even vibrato isn't as expressive as a good slide in the right place (in my opinion)
It's sarcasm in response to the dozens of people all saying the same thing about the tempo. If nobody heard of this composition before, nobody would be remarking on the speed. Anyways, it's not a very interesting critique to me and probably reflects the musical maturity of most posters. I thought Piatiagorsky played it extremely beautifully. His tone may be unmatched among all cellists and his romantic style is unmistaken.
Faure originally intended this piece to be played with piano and cello, and played with the correct level of intimacy, I think it sounds better. Nothing wrong with this particular version. He takes it faster than others, but that's not really a problem.
etoy de acuerdo contigo en que esta muy rapido, sin embargo creo que por lo demas esta perfecta, al aumentar la velocidad se pierde un poco de expresión, pero esta bien, le cambia el caaracter a una obra que por lo general siempre es tocada de la misma manera. sin mencionar que tecnicamente esta perfecta.
Uno de los grandes músicos judíos, los músicos judíos son famosos en diversos instrumentos. No tocan muy bien pero son considerados los mejores siempre. Es que ser judío es ser especial y el mejor.
@JonRobert The rigidity with which this generation hears classical music is a backlash against great art. The fact that most of the negative comments on this page (and literally dozens of my other ones) have focused on attempts to impose that rigidity towards the musician discourages me. The musician's job is not to interpret what the composer wanted but to interpret what they THINK the composer wanted. This distinction has a lot to do with personality and creativity and what makes music great.
@aimson I see past the performance speed and think this piece is played beautifully. Although at the beginning the problem I think people have is that there is not enough musicality in his playing and therefore it doesn't sound right, and coupled with the speed it sounds unlike how the legend Piatigorsky should have played it.
I'm not sure how cello differs from the violin but this logic about the sound seems off. The more bow hair you have in contact with the string, the more sound that gets produced. After all, sound is generated from the friction between the bow+rosin and the string. In theory, a bow that is 3 inches wide will sound far louder than a 1 inch bow.
Pressure and placement of the bow on the string, as well as the size and resonance of the cello itself, also affect the sound. It is simplistic to expect the amount of bow hair/string contact to be the only factor in sound production.
@JonRobert The viewpoint that a musician's job is to play "correctly" has resulted in a plethora of monotonous and vapid classical musicians flooding the market all around the globe on all different instruments. It especially plagues the world of violin, where personal creativity and ingenuity have been dampened to the point of near nonexistence. The rise of music "competitions" have a lot to do with discouraging creativity because they literally force musicians to conform to a limited standard.
And what of it? Piatigorsky's interpretation simply moves more than most others (in fact, I'd say that in comparison I find slower interpretations stagnant and too viscous). As to your question about emotion...I think that if you have to ask no one can help you. All I know is that this is the recording I keep coming back to without fail.
They cut out a lot of parts when the orchestra would get the melody. I'm actually quite surprised because they are interpretive parts for the cellist as well! Regardless, this was gorgeous.
Well, I'm not sure what Faure intended for the piece since I'm not Faure (nor a cellist). Perhaps you could comment on what you think Faure intended and why you like Therese Ryan (who I've never heard of). Also, what is so bad about glissandos? You have to remember that Piatigorsky is from a more romantic era than modern musicians, who often shun and discourage glissando use as you do.
dude i disagree with you, and what gets my attention is that you say "this is" just crap, you cannot say this is because there is not absolute point of view, it is just your point of view. i think this is the best rendition of Faure's elegie in youtube,
I prefer this piece played with a piano accompaniment rather than an orchestral, but it's still quite beautiful. I'm more a fan of Jacqueline du Pre's version, honestly, but Piatigorsky does it justice, I think.
People back then had more of their own styles and his vibrato and bow hold are examples of this. Today things are more generic. That is apart from the opinion of liking it or not liking, but I agree that it should be slower with some different feel.
I think it's not so much that he's rushing as the speed that he chooses to play the Elegie, because it's supposed to be a funeral thingy. This piece can be really drawn out and be much more powerfully than Piatigorsky plays it here. It's a matter of interpretation.
not every performance has to be a catharsis. there is some degree of class in understatement. anyone that has to dump their musicianship all the time is a ham. also different cellists have different things they play better. yo yo ma on Prokofiev i am amazed at. him on the bach suites he sounds robotic. lynn harrell on bloch's shelomo was gut wrenchingly amazing.
@aimson Personally, I love Piatigorsky's playing most of the time, and I love this piece. However, I DO prefer it slow--the tempo is marked "molto adagio". That means "very slowly" (basically). I think he plays it too fast here. I don't like it. My teacher NEVER told me to play it slow. My teacher lets me read the tempo markings and decide for myself, and offer his own opinion, criticism, and thoughts. I think it is quite rude of you to make assumptions like that, not to mention unintelligent.
In fact, one can use this productively, using the side of the bow for less sound in pianissimo (also playing closer to the fingerboard) and playing closer to the bridge with the full bow for forte. The quality (not quantity) of the sound, however might be different in the way you describe. Also, I agree about the tempo - if Piatigorsky wants to play it at that tempo and knows the full consequences of it, then that is good musicianship. If it's unintended, shame on him.
I think that when you reach this caliber of proffessionalism, 20bpm faster is not a biggie. Depending on what edition this was played from is a big jump in speeds marked. Leave it to the masters to interpret, and not the casual listener.
I love the piece, I have performed it several times, but I don't think that he does it justice, he has several irregular tempo changes, cut down a part, and completely omitted another. Overall I think it was too fast and not "elegiac" enough
It's not a high horse, it's called "anticipatory control." Just watching out for shit fights. You'd be surprised at how often that happens on RU-vid, especially after dumb comments like this one. I really don't mind critique of meistro Piatigorsky. For example, I don't agree that the tempo is too fast but I can understand and it makes sense. However, this post is as offensive as it is thoughtless, which prompted my harsh comment.
Dude shut up people back then held their cello low and he is a lot better than anyone today. I don't know what you mean by him not being technically solid there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. If you don't like it then stop watching it.
Violin and cello playing really are not that different, especially in the right hand. I've been a violinist for 10 years and my brother has been a cellist for 10 years, and I watch his classes. I can tell good cello playing when I see it, and I have not seen anyone play better than Piatigorsky today.
I have to say, nice tune, however, the tempo is a little quick. (it is marked at eight note equals 60, i believe) Personnaly, I dont like how he sounds on the 32nd triplet runs. But I dont play cello... I like Webber's version better.
