Rachmaninoff was so rich in colors, imaginagion, and harmony. He was a very unique composer, combined romantic style with rich modern harmonies and unique mixture.
No. 4 is my favorite Rachmaninoff's piece and also my favorite classical piece of all time. It's powerful and gentle at the same time, extremely melodious. I listen to this every single day and I'm dreaming of playing it myself. I've been playing the piano since I was 8 (I'm 22 now) and I once tried to learn it with my piano teacher a few years ago but struggled too much (I have small hands). But I won't give up, I will try to play it again, I don't care if it takes months for me to learn it, I will do it !
I’ve said it before and will say it until I die, I love looking at Rachmaninoff’s scores (though they intimidate me greatly) There is just so much going on, I could imagine his sheet music being turned into some sort of impressionistic artwork. So many notes, voices, lines and not to mention the beautiful sound which these notes represent.
I absolutely love the way Lugansky brings out the left-hand counter-melody in 33/4. For some reason, the two etudes that Rach. left out of his set are my two favorites of the op. 33 set (#3 and #4, although they're all great). And L's sense of stillness and beauty in in 33/3 is just perfect.
How can having a favourite composer be a "biased" opinion? We're entitled to have our opinions even though not everyone, of course, agrees with our choice. I like and respect almost all of the great composers, of whom Rachmaninoff is clearly one. Yes, the études are amazing compositions, which Lugansky brings out very well.
Lugansky. The emotionality and art of his playing - phrasing, tempo manipulation, voicing out important lines and notes, a spectrum in the richness of chords, climactic build, letting a color ring a little longer - my attention never wanders.
Thank you so much, Ashish! This was a remarkable comparison! All of your notes and remarks were SPOT ON! I have played these and have heard all except the Sofronitsky! WOW!...I have to do more homework! As you said,....."Unbelievably tender and rich." I am in awe....Thanks again!
Interesting point...I'm inclined to agree with you.I,too,find the Op.33 set more interesting.The third one of the set was incorporated into 4th Piano Concerto (slow movement).😊 I think the same applies to the two sets of Chopin etudes,Op.10 and Op.25.😀😋
I wish I could donate to your channel, thanks for making such great uploads with such fantastic written descriptions accompanying them. You're doing the Lord's work here keeping this stuff accessible to modern audiences. Thank you.
I adore your channel. You truly are providing us with treasures, and you have the knowledge and eloquence to match them. Hats off and immense appreciation from Berlin.
I've been listening to and reading you posts for many months. Many thanks for you considerable efforts in synchronizing the music to the sheet music, and your insightful comments.
It's amazing what Rachmaninoff was able to accomplish as a composer using a very methodical, straightforward approach to composition. He never seemed to deviate too much into the unknown, but his compositions are satisfying and masterful.
What do you mean with “very methodical and straightforward approach to composition”? I can’t think of any other composer that instead deviated into unknown with their compositions, so I’m very curious to understand your point of view!
It's as though he took a break from the accessible preludes to reveal what really goes on in his mind for musicians and the most discerning of listeners.
@@salihayorga2445 Just read through the piece and can confirm it's actually achievable, but the point is you have to find some structure, break it into parts and phrases and not look at it as a bunch of notes
If only there was more of Sofronitsky on your channel. Not that I'm complaining, this channel is among a handful of my absolute favorites. Superb taste.
11:41- 11:55 The left hand of this part requires a huge flexible hand and insanely tricky control (whether we will played it exactly or with some arpeggios. Of course too much use of pedal is out of question if we want to observe the contrast between legato and stacatto). I really want the third hand.
I love Ashkenazy - had the pleasure of meeting him once and having an unforgettable conversation - but I do think 33/4 benefits from a slower tempo i.e. Lugansky. The soprano line shortly after the chromatic ascent (near the end) is just too exquisite for words and feels monumentally Russian when played this way.
Lugansky certainly has the superior phrasing, but Ashkenazy has so much passion there that it's difficult to remain unconvinced. Try Korbin's interpretation, also on RU-vid!
I've finally finished No.4! This video was great help for me and I recommend other piano player to play this piece. I also have some advice to help people who have never played a Rachmaninoff song before. Firstly, THIS SONG IS HARD! So take your time and play a lot of hand separate. I know its boring, but if you don't break down this song in hand separate it will be very difficult to learn. Just play one section of the piece hand separate, then play hands together once you have hand separate down. Then repeat till the end of the song. Always count! This one might be obvious, but I know people who don't count, and they always rush. Always count to keep the tempo at a steady pace. Lastly always write down accidentals, this piece is full of accidentals so make sure you write it down so you don't forget. It's also good to mark accents, different dynamics and other things that effect the piece. And that's about it! Just take things slow and you will have a good time playing this piece :).
I have to say that I love having the score on the screen. Sometimes I like to see the pianist’s hands, to see just what they’re doing, but why do that when you can have the score and see *exactly* what they’re doing? Sometimes its’ quite surprising. Always interesting!
Might one's preference depend on the pianists' schooling and age and the same criteria for listeners? Some people grow used to a style or styles of playing and find playing that deviates from that or those styles less interesting, less satisfying. Others may have grown used to a style or styles of playing but welcome hearing works played differently from the style or styles to which they're accustomed. I'm less familiar with Rachmaninov than with Beethoven, so I'll take Beethoven to continue my thought. I have friends who grew up with Artur Schnabel's interpretation of the Beethoven sonatas (fewer now -- live; most -- with recordings). Several of them, after hearing younger pianists, have told me the "youngsters" lack something that Schnabel found and transmitted in his playing. I may be mistaken, but am inclined to believe these friends listen to Beethoven with "Schnabel" ears and hence cannot perhaps find what makes the "youngsters'" playing interesting, even thrilling, depending of course on the work.
@@tserkoslavjanskij You make a valid point. There is a generational factor involved here, styles and conceptions obviously evolve, eg as a music student during the 1960s I heard as saw such names as Richter, Ashkenazy, Pollini, Arrau and Kempff to name but a few who were star names on the world recital circuit at that time. During those years I always found Richters and the young Ashkenazys interpretations of Rachmaninov especially convincing, their technical mastery was such that for me they truly penetrated the interior sound world of the composer. Subsequently there are of course far younger names nowadays giving very different but no less convincing accounts of these masterworks.
I love Ashkenazy's Op. 33 No. 4 - the slightly more impetuous movement is engaging from the outset and gives an effortless thrust to musical drama. His interpretation doesn't take itself too seriously and yet the weight of dramatic content is conveyed convincingly. However, my absolute favorite performance of any Rachmaninoff Etude Tableau has to be Van Cliburn's Op. 39 No. 5 - it seems to express everything that particular piece is all about with passion and eloquence.
It is a hard choice to choose between Lugansky and Ashkenazy in the Rachmaninoff etudes (including Op. 39). Fortunately we don't have to choose. We can enjoy both as fascinating alternative ways to play some of the greatest piano music ever penned.
Can you imagine Lugansky was giving a free country in my town ( the randomest town ever tbh) , I found out the night before and I went to listen to his études tableaux, and then took a picture with him.
Anybody else's mind blown by how Lugansky and Ashkenazy manage to add a middle C at the end of the 6/4 bar at 1:10? Where is it possible to use the sostenuto pedal?!?
The etudes-tableaux have always been a mystery to me but finally. listening to the amazing Ashkenazy version here they come into focus! Lugansky, although brilliant technically. sees them as studies but Ashkenazy seems to understand this music from the inside out and the difference is staggering. I didn't listen to the Sofronitsky: his piano was too weird from the start. I will want to hear these again but I doubt I will find anything comparable to Ashkenazy. I have to say though that I have often been disappointed by Ashkenazy performances. But not here!
If you listen through number 3, when it gets past the andante like section, into the agitato section, you can hear insane similarities between it and and I believe his 3rd concerto (I’m having trouble remembering which one but I’m pretty sure) Edit: I’m thinking of the 4th I’m pretty sure
Kumar, полностью с тобой согласен насчет 1-ой баллады shopin?(№7) не смотрел твоего описания сразу пришло на ум(честно), тональность и все такое, в точку!! Только не понимаю насчет неополитанской мелодии, что это??
Anyone who likes this should drop what they are doing and order / download the complete Etude-Tableaux by Lugansky. I've heard particular pieces better - for example, Cliburn's E Flat Minor recording (Op 39) was the definitive version though at the height of his powers. But as a group this recording tops the chart. Note that Lugansky did not engage in the irritating"speed games" so beloved of new artists. I bought the Brilliant Classic (3 cd) version that also had the preludes by Marietta Petkova
Wow, really great video and what a description, I was just wondering if we talk about no.4, who do you like the most? lugansky or ashkenazy? I love to play (and listen to) it at slower tempo, but i have to say that ashkenazy's interpretation is a blast, especially the last part is hearthtearingly beautiful.
No. 2 sounds the most like the Rachmaninoff the public knows from those ubiquitous concerti, along with the C major part of No. 3. The rest have to grow on you, so to speak.
No. 5 name is "metel' " what mean blazzard. I'm played this etude year ago in the 2nd course of college and absolutely fall in it. Now, I'm playing this etude and take it in my program
Lugansky pulls off those insidiously intricate passages as easily as I play a glissando. Any lunk off the street can play a gliss, in case anybody didn't know that. I'd give two weeks of my life for one hour inside that head while he's playing.
