Hello everyone, If you want to listen to more rehearsals of Horowitz at Carnegie Hall, you should listen to tomorrow's video (Horowitz - Carnegie Hall Rehearsal, 13 January 1965 (Practicing, Conversations, Chopin etc)) : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QjsbwdF9Cw4.html
I was blessed to have been at this concert. Got on ticket line at 5:30AM (I was No.135). Balcony tickets were going for $3.00. At 19 I was a big fan of his recordings. Needless to say his performance was above my expectations. A day to truly remember. Thanks for posting this.
That's amazing! I don't suppose you were at the famous Bernstein/Gould/NYPO performance of the Brahms piano concerto no. 1 the previous year? Sadly I was born 20 years too late (and even then would have been a newborn baby!)
Yes I can improvise like this... no problem with same depth and intensity but what I listen now is making me still want live??? POLONAISE op.61 I can't I won't this is what it is... what the universe wanted and what CHOPIN never knew could be possible... it is of such beauty colours, aromas, taste and other ridiculous things that are not relevant to the essence of the language of the universe (maybe champagne is) well... Volodymyr I love you and I see you soon. But first I record 4th ballade (of course sjopin) but in the way you wanted after you died.
Wow the improvisation starting out was heavenly to me and i couod imagine being in the audiance and hearing the beautiful sound filling all the empty spaces of Carnegie Hall.
Жаль, что в то время ,когда играл Владимир Горовиц играл не сделали фильм. Не догадались, некому было Гадать. Спасибо, хотя бы за запись. ВЛАДИМИРУ ГОРОВЦУ ПАМЯТЬ. 🙏🌹🌹🌹🌹🙏
The improvising is just Horowitz testing his technique and touch and getting himself focused. There are videos of Martha Argerich doing the same thing. This was common at one time. I saw Horowitz twice in the late 70's. His playing was nothing like his recordings. He was one of the last players to not play like a recording. He also showed the depth and sublime nature of the live piano recital. He made me feel he was playing for me alone. His ability to communicate with an audience was unparalleled. What Emanuel Ax is saying is that Horowitz found things in the music that no one else was finding and communicating them to the audience.
Doesnt sound harmonic basic nothing. He even modulating and making so much interesting stuff, its difficult harmonicallyas hell, sounds like a mix of scriabin and romantic era. So what u saying basic harmonies in b flat? He modulated so many times in such a professional way and the amount of sound is majestic. @@Pogouldangeliwitz
@@gabriele6596 He doesn't modulate at all. There's just medium basic chord progressions most of us do use while improvising. But he stays in B flat minor throughout the whole 3 minutes. The execution is absolutely gorgeous though, like I said, despite a wrong note or an uneven fast passage here and there.
Starting off as a composer then becoming a "frustrated composer" he was a master improvisor.He could have easily sold his concert out on improvisation alone
I’ll never understand people who hear one pianist (or other instrumentalist) as, “THE BEST,” excluding all others. And Emanuel Ax (not “AXE”) isn’t exactly the best critic out there, and I would venture to say that the very best musicians all hear things others don’t, simply bc they’re not robots, and every interpretation is unique to them. Also, there’s no way to objectively judge the most accomplished musicians...every opinion is purely subjective. So I really can’t decide why a person would choose one pianist to the exclusion of all others....for one thing, if one only listens to other fabulous pianists to find fault, then the process is false and highly artificial. Maybe non-musicians are the ones who fall into this vacuum, and perhaps they judge by reputation and not their own ears?? I don’t know. For myself, I love to hear the different interpretations of each piece I listen to, bc such hugely gifted pianists all have something important to say and I want to hear what it is! Their voices are as individual as singers’ voices, but if one can’t hear those differences, maybe that is the reason for excluding all others? And I’m finding “new” pianists all the time, thanks to YT, artists who were celebrated in their time, but for some reason are now not as popular....when I listen to them play, it’s often as though I’m hearing familiar pieces for the first time! If I listened to various pianists only to find fault when compared with my “favorite”-a hugely negative process, I must add-then I’d stop listening altogether. What would be the point?
A great memory to have waited through the night to get tickets. Mrs Horowitz came by with coffee. A guy slept in a tent ahead of me. My friend and I just waited all night. No coffee, alas. I guess other, below, even remember their number in line, but I can't claim that I did. Thanks for posting.
Thank you for this gem! The performance of Bach's Adagio here is so much better than the recording from the recital. A lot more intimate, intense, and singing. I guess despite all this rehearsing, he was indeed nervous on the day of the concert.
This is so interesting to hear! One of the greatest improvisers ever - absolutely fantastic. He gets colors out of the piano like no one else. Bach and Chopin were great, of course, but the Debussy etude is also another highlight. Wish he'd played more of this music.
Que extraordinaria grabacion. Horowitz además de todas sus grandes cualidades como pianista tenía un sonido magico. Posiblemente porque la sala estaba vacía y se aprecia mucho mejor. Gracias
Most important for me is the performance of the Polonaise Fantasy with the RIGHT ending just as in the 1966 live recording and not as he later did (1978-1983 ) or earlier (1951) . Thank you so much for this.
Completely agree. Actually, I am shocked. The piano sounds like Holy Vibrations emanating from The Original Source, forming the miracle called Creation. Awesome. Amen.
I was unaware of the Chopin Opus 61 rehearsal recording. Words cannot describe the landscape he painted with this piece. I believe it to be Chopin's crowning jewel, and this interpretation was exquisite.
this piece is so indescribable as it is but horowitz takes it to another level. there are so many moods and textures all wrapped up together. this was made for horowitz.
Hello Jean-Jacques, Yes there is more. I will upload tomorow another reheasal session at Carnegie Hall : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QjsbwdF9Cw4.html
Interesting how they tuned the piano, and much brighter voicing than modern offerings, however this was closer to the pianos of the composers themselves.
It’s him, not the piano! You can see the proof when he played on Scriabin’s (or was it Tchaikovsky’s?) old piano, before his Moscow concert! You can immediately distinguish his touch!
@@andream.464agreed. I immediately heard it. He's a master at partially using the soft pedal. He adjusts it so that the hammer strikes the strings in different locations on the hammer head, enabling him to bring out a whole different dimension to his sound. He was a true engineer at heart and was blessed with quite a musical imagination.
they assume. One would have to have enough knowledge of the repertory to know that he is actually improvising. I believe that he is not, instead he is stringing bits of his own transpositions that he never published. Some of it though does sound like pure improvisation.
He’s alternating improvisations and excerpts of actual compositions. The improvisation part is made at the moment and not “some transcription he didn’t publish”. Anyone who met him said he could improvise anything at any moment.
Yes I can improvise like this... no problem with same depth and intensity but what I listen now is making me still want live??? POLONAISE op.61 I can't I won't this is what it is... what the universe wanted and what CHOPIN never knew could be possible... it is of such beauty colours, aromas, taste and other ridiculous things that are not relevant to the essence of the language of the universe (maybe champagne is) well... Volodymyr I love you and I see you soon. But first I record 4th ballade (of course sjopin) but in the way you wanted after you died. Beantwoorden
The man never did pre-practiced recitations. When he played, it was always a musical event--sometimes mundane and other times, gems emerged. It's funny that when he finally segued into the Bach Busoni, the improvisatory character didn't change. The internal filters his performing emerged through were those of a composer. Horowitz will always be sought out. It doesn't matter whether you agree with him or not. Artists unlike Horowitz, like Murray Perahia, worked with him, because they recognized the universality of his musicianship, and were not put off by his stupendous pianism.
Come on Suela!! The Truth is Horowitz not the Greatest! Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli=THE CYBORG HUMAN MACHINE KING ROBOT ABM!! Better more Colorful Beautiful piano Sound than Horowitz=Wilhelm Kempff Emil Gilels Radu Lupu Rubinstein Ashkenazy! MORE POWERFUL Louder than Horowitz and ABM!=Mikhail Pletnev the Supernova Explosion POWER! The Second Loudest Hardest Hitter of The Keyboard was Lazar Berman!! More Genius than ABM and Horowitz=Sviatoslav Richter Solomon Cutner Grigory Sokolov Maurizio Pollini Alexei Lubimov Stanislav Igolinsky!!!!!
@@groovy-kb8km Don't believe it to be the case. He transcribed to the piano works that he never published nor performed except rarely in encores. There is probably some of that music in these alleged 'improvisations'.
@@mvcm1688 those are meaningless words. Just like jazz, an improvisation is more or less repeating musical language and memorized material that can be transposed and re-used. It can be difficult to tell how improvised an improvisation is.
Rachmaninoff became not holy in comparison but much good through just improvising(+extremely long fingers), and l think good education as usually in East, not always in west
Сейчас никто не играет как он, и дело не в том, что «раньше было лучше», дело в культурном богатстве окружающей среды и в генах. Одно без другого не способно раскрыть потенциал артиста, художника, выразить всю полноту человеческих чувств и чаяний. Владимир Самуилович на всю жизнь остался киевлянином с русским восприятием музыки, главным представителем русской пианистической школы. Во времена его детства дети интеллигентных семей получали образование, в рамках которого формировались моральные и духовные штифты, на которых всю человеческую жизнь насаживается восприятие окружающей действительности. Ныне нет той среды и нет мест, в которых рождаются подобные Горовицу. Нет нужды в том воспитании и образовании, что раньше давало миру титанов духа.
Я полностью согласен с вашим утверждением о важности культурной среды, к которому я добавляю личный опыт и опыт того времени: вынужденная эмиграция, идеологическая поляризация, политико-религиозные преследования, две мировые войны... (Я пишу вам с переводом Google. Мой родной язык - испанский.)
I was having my.piano lesson in graduate school when the phonevrang and my teacher said, "do you mind if I take this call", I replied, "no, not at all" which she did and I pretended not to eavesdrop but to accidently overhear. She talked to for quite some time as I looked at my score, pretending busy. They discussed fingerings at length as she was and still is a whiz at fingerings. When they were done, I meekly asked, ME. Who was that? She said, "that was Vladimir Mr. Horowitz, I said, Vladimir horowitz, she said, Yes! He often calls me for fingerings on different pieces." After I picked my jaw up off the floor, she said, "HE is very meticulous about fingering. always seeking alternative fingerings. That's why he calls me. He is one of a kind. There will never bbe another. Later I was to find out that Jorge Bolet also called her for fingerings. By now you should know who my.piano teacher was in grad school. The greatest prodigy since Mozart, and a frigging genius at fingering anything. She can do it in her head. She wrote an article in the book about Mr. HOROWITZ. They were very close friends. He called often and visited. I never got to meet him, but could have and should have.
@@eddiemcmurray8415 Madame Ruth Slenczynska is a marvelous pianist and teacher. I heard her perform in the early 1970s. She also gave a Master class. I was so young I don't remember much of the Master class, but I do remember the concert was spectacular.
@@j.d.miller4203 you are so right. She is an incredible teacher and performer. Her master classes were informative and heavy either information. I heard her perform all 5 Beethoven Piano concertos, the Saint Saens g minor, both the Chopin, the Tchaikovsky, and the shostakovic which she learned in two days over the weekend and performed on Monday evening to standing ovation. She knew the Schuman, the Grieg, and the Mozart d minor as well as many others, all the Mozart and Beethoven sonatas and by age 12, she knew everything Chopin had written. When I say she is incredible, I mean that and more. Her teachers were Cortot, Schnabel, Joseph Levinne, Rachmanninov who said at age nine " she has no technique. WHAT? She was playing all the Chopin etudes daily as warm up BEFORE PRACTICING, at age 5 without mistakes, or she got slammed to the floor by her father. There was no piano difficulty she could not solve with ease and teach you how to overcome. She often perform 24 preludes and 4 Ballades as well as a selection of etudes on many programs. She once opine while playing excerpts of all 5 Beethoven concerts for our amusement, I've played these for so.long and so often, I could play them on a bucket and spoon. Not a one of us doubted it. That was in 1977. She is an absolute wonder and national treasure. I kid you not.
His playing made me have the feeling he was THE alchemist of the piano's sonoric possibilities.As musician he was certainly not the most profound or authentic such as Schnabel, Landowska, Hess, Solomon...Rachmaninoff. A transcendent pianist of course! Met and talked with him several times, heard the result of this rehearsal in Nay and many more !
interesting comment, i am ambivalent about horowitz technique too but he may have evolved and changed technique over his later years compensating for his age.
I wouldn't call it ugly, I mean I've definitely seen some qualified ugly techniques lol!!! But his technique was definitely a little unorthodox, in that he played with those long flat fingers he had, I wouldn't be surprised if that's why he was kinda known to miss notes almost regularly, But MAN could he create the most beautiful colors and tones playing that way. I'm sure a Chopin would have cringed at his technique, but yet would've loved the emotion and sound he could still produce. Listen to him playing Schubert, preferably live, and I have no idea how he creates all those different colors/tones etc..Of course Horowitz was always known for his Chopin and Rach, but his Schubert playing was second to none really...
@@brandonwarweg3622 Again he was over 80 years old in most videos with visuals of his fingers that we have. Is that still the technique of his peak ? I think it might have evolved to compensate for age. I doubt that his youth Liszt rapsodies recordings with ferocious octaves was done with flat fingers or wrist below the level of the keykoard, but maybe i am wrong and this was his whole career technique. What i strongly disagree with you about is that he was a worthwile chopinist. Yes those flat fingers make for more legato bel canto playing which Chopin championed but Horowitz sense of rythm is far too lisztian, his rubato is distorted and unatural, and that makes his Chopin, non chopinesque. Even Rachmaninov who was educated around the same time as H. had a much more natural, effective rubato in his Chopin's scherzo, nocturnes and waltzes and sonata. H.'s playing has a machine like character, but yes his touch and colors ability are there, he only got half of what is needed to be a reference Chopin interpreter. But he was no doubt a the top of Liztian capable performers. Later in his life he did try to detach himself of that cold virtuoso reputation, interestingly in the same way that Liszt himself tried to completely melt and recast his technique when he got > 30 years old because by that point he hated how he was reputed for his physical prowess at the keyboard and fast octaves and probably saw how Chopin's legacy as a composer was growing which he would have wanted for himself very much like Horrowitz true wish would have been to be a composer. But Horowitz explained that he had to be performer pianist by financial necessity after his upper class father lost all in the Russian revolution.
@@ericastier1646 Maybe it was from "Horowitz plays Mozart" that I watched and heard Horowitz answer the question "Did you learn this technique ?" and he said : "No, it can't be learned. It's something you have or not. My teacher used to tell me : I don't care how you do it, do it with your nose if you have to". Is it still a technique if you just play instinctively ? I mean, there is practice of course. That's why he also admitted, talking about some other pianists : "they do things I can't do". Edit : In fact, the first anecdote is from a filmed interview in Amsterdam (1986). He explained more about his flat fingers that sometimes were rounded depending of what effect he intended to produce.
@@martinmysteres1384 I read before that the quote about "using your nose if you have to" is attributed to Mozart, and H's teacher might simply have passed it along to students. I noticed how In later years H. really wanted to change his public image into a conventional classic repertoire performer such as Mozart and distance himself from the "beastly pianism" he had been famous for in mid-career (no video). People used to say you don't go to a H. concert to listen to classical music you go to see H. and i think that must have made him feel like a circus show freak and he wanted to be seen as a noble musician. Technique is what allows you to play certain repertoire, if you are never corrected and learn instinctively, your technique will be shaped by the pieces you learn. My life long study of playing the piano leads me to say there is definitively two types of piano techniques : #1 is ultra legato, allows variety of colors, tone subtle variation and favors a larger hand and is played with a rather flat hand. It is ideal for many passages in the romantic repertoire but cannot produce the pearly, brilliancy and full tone in more demanding runs on the keyboard and tends to be prone to wrong notes. The #2 technique is a dome shaped hand that is kept very calm above the keys and where keys are stricken at a much steeper finger angle giving an effortlessly brilliant pearly even tone in the most difficult and fast passages. It is a more difficult technique to learn because it does not come naturally to people with larger hands. Yet people with smaller hands are forced to adopt that technique much earlier on to keep progressing which later turns to their advantage. But there are ways to still play those piece with technique #1 but it will lack full tone and evenness and will be prone to wrong notes. Chopin's music requires both techniques used at different times. There is a danger in becoming very good at technique #1 were the pianist will persist to use it even were technique #2 is called for. This is how i see Horrowit's pianism. Even when he recorded a Mozart concerto in his last video, he was using technique #1 all along when Mozart shines much better with technique #2. In fact you can make a successful career with #1 only if you choose your repertoire carefully. One unorthodox variant of technique #2 is Glenn Gould, his fingers are curved but his wrist so low he is almost like a climber hanging on a rock cliff by the tip of his fingers. He obtains a singing perfectly even tone going effortlessly in the most difficult passages but there is no legato, no colors, no tone variety in that technique. It remains perfectly suited for JS Bach polytonal music and he notoriously stayed clear from the romantic repertoire. I think only a few pianists like Chopin himself mastered both #1 and #2 techniques, why i know this is from his compositions especially his etudes which sometimes call for huge hand stretches (technique #1, and people with small hand simply have to give up learning those pieces) and others seem to require #1 but in fact can only be mastered with #2 , like Op 10 no 1.
HE'D BE BANNED NOW!!! (Dublin got there first banning the Russians from the Piano Competition). What a sad bunch who really only use music as a platform to promote their arrogance.
Horowitz didn't like contemporary music styles (i.e. serialism, avant-garde, experientialism, etc.) which is why he omitted it almost entirely from his repertoire when he returned to the concert stage in 1965 and thereafter.
The Scriabine's 9th and 10th Sonatas however very challenging modern pieces, for player and listener.At the Soviet Embassy Horowitz gave the 🇺🇸 premieres of the 6th, 7th and 8th Sonatas of Prokofiev.
@@christopherczajasager9030 I would still put Scriabin mature period compositions into late-romanticism than modern, meaning they are valuable. Even Prokofiev avant- guarde composition style is a hidden kind of late romanticism. Up to 1920 good classical music was still composed. Anything after that is a farce which has fallen into oblivion despite the persistence of academia to teach it to students, and whatever music category it was called by those who 'invented' it, is too being forgotten, erased entirely from history. And I think rightfully so. It's hard to remember something that is 'nothing'.
@@christopherczajasager9030 I don't see any Ukrainians greeting the Russian soldiers with flowers. They are not welcome in the Ukraine, now more then at any time in the past. I hope for the Russians to stop their lies, to stop killing and to denationalize and to denazify the Kremlin.
Too right he wouldn’t. He described himself as ‘the embassidor of peace’ when the cultural exchange was in efffect before the end of the Cold War. I think he’d be horrified and Ashkenazy, Trifinov, Lugansky, Volodos, Kissin and others too.
