Rachmaninoff's Scriabin
bb
What do you guys make of R's only Scriabin recording (Prelude Op
11/8)? I seem to remember Farhan Malik saying that it shows 'no
understanding of the piece'. I really like it though, it actually
reminds me of Pogorelich, the way he twists it with great sensitivity.
It's a pity he didn't record more Scriabin, his 5th Sonata was, by all
accounts, very provocative.
b
(reply-to address disabled)
IMCA
I would respectfully disagree on this issue with Mr. Malik. On the
contrary, Rachmaninoff's peformance is exemplary, and demonstrates
nothing if not his "composer's ear" view of the work. He is respectful
of Scriabin's own wishes, such as he codified his compositional
intentions in the score. As always, Scriabin was meticulous about
those intentions and the notation he chose to convey them.
SR's is an extraordinarily detailed, remarkably intelligible
reading, perhaps a bit slower and rhythmically steady than other
performances. Unlike some other pianists, Rachmaninoff refuses to
allow the prelude to disintegrate into so much rhythmic taffy,
pulling it this way and that in the name of some ersatz "rubato" ; the
triplets in the LH are maintained steadily, precisely and illuminated
in contrast to the motivic intonations in widely spaced intervals that
define the activity of the right hand. It's an odd juxtaposition,
because the harmonic rhythm of thw work is essentially quite fast, but
must not appear to be. The "agitato" Scriabin asks for in the tempo
marking is one that the savvy interpreter realizes is something that
isw and must be conveyed from within, froj the internal workings of
the usic itself and its unuusal intervalic relationships. Agitato here
does not mean hysterical, or nervous --not at all -- but intense.
Indeed, Scriabin was especially careful and fond of notating a kind
of "built-in" rubato by means of the notation; one need only look at
the way the work is beamed and slurred to discern what he had in mind;
notice, for example, that Scriabin took the trouble to write
individual slurs across single bars - that is, across the smaller
metrical units, rather than large ones.
As for the pianistic issues (which Rachmannoff never fetishizes at the
expense of musical ones) his performance is beyond reproach. His
command of dynamics, allwithin the context of piano/pianissimo is
incomparable. His command of quiescence is all the more remarkable
when you think how much else he has to deal with in this deceptively
simple work.
John Bell Young
Of all the extant recorded performance s of this prelude, then, Sergei
Rachmaninoff's remains among the greatest, and, I expect, always will.
John Bell Young
.
IMCA
I should add to my previous comments that the tempo that SR choses,
which as I mentioned is a bit slower than some, but significant for
its steady pulse and unhurried demeanour (wherein the individual
eighths that make up the LH triplets are treated equally), compliments
the melancholy mood of the work, which in turn represents an
idiosyncratically Russian idea about tempo itself, namely, stasis.
Stasis as a compositional as well as an interpretive device is
indigenous, for example, in the music of Mussorgsky -- in Boris, yes
-- but nowhere more so than in Khovanschina. The kind of sadness,
even hopelessness conveyed by such inner stillness (which is only an
illusion, really, as there is quite a lot going on harmonically and
otherwise) give way to the gentle poignancy that befits this prelude
of Scriabin, and many other works of this composer.
John Bell Young
wayne dooley
attending a performance of SR playing Scriabin, a tribute concert I believe.
As the story goes, most were very critical of SR's performance, saying while
the score called for the music to soar, with SR each note stood firmly on
the ground. Prokofiev knowing these criticisms went nonetheless to
congratulate SR afterwards but did so in his usual awkward manner - "well,
in spite of everything it went very well" (or some such), to which SR took
great offense and the 2 did not speak for years.
wayne
"IMCA" <im...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:448889ba.02103...@posting.google.com...
Simon Smith
"wayne dooley" <wrdo...@attbi.com> wrote:
> Along these lines, I read an interesting story about Prokofiev and others
> attending a performance of SR playing Scriabin, a tribute concert I
> believe. As the story goes, most were very critical of SR's performance,
> saying while the score called for the music to soar, with SR each note
> stood firmly on the ground. Prokofiev knowing these criticisms went
> nonetheless to congratulate SR afterwards but did so in his usual awkward
> manner - "well, in spite of everything it went very well" (or some such),
> to which SR took great offense and the 2 did not speak for years.
As I read it (which was some time ago, and I have a terrible memory) it was
SVR who was the more unpleasant:
Prokofiev: "Well, pet, you played it very well".
SVR: "And I suppose you expected me to play it badly?" [stalks off]
Admittedly the "pet" was my editorial addition. I also got the impression
that they never talked at all after that, nor that they ever had done in
the past, but I could be wrong.
Simon
--
Simon Smith | Clare College, Cambridge | sd...@cam.ac.uk
http://www.fourthconcerto.free-online.co.uk/ [temporarily]
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:67048d8f...@sds46.clare.cam.ac.uk:
> In message <8N%w9.17081$bG.9948@rwcrnsc53>
> "wayne dooley" <wrdo...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
>> Along these lines, I read an interesting story about Prokofiev and
>> others attending a performance of SR playing Scriabin, a tribute
>> concert I believe. As the story goes, most were very critical of SR's
>> performance, saying while the score called for the music to soar,
>> with SR each note stood firmly on the ground. Prokofiev knowing
>> these criticisms went nonetheless to congratulate SR afterwards but
>> did so in his usual awkward manner - "well, in spite of everything it
>> went very well" (or some such), to which SR took great offense and
>> the 2 did not speak for years.
>
> As I read it (which was some time ago, and I have a terrible memory)
> it was SVR who was the more unpleasant:
> Prokofiev: "Well, pet, you played it very well".
> SVR: "And I suppose you expected me to play it badly?" [stalks off]
>
> Admittedly the "pet" was my editorial addition. I also got the
> impression that they never talked at all after that, nor that they
> ever had done in the past, but I could be wrong.
Didn't Richter make his professional debut *conducting* Prokofiev's
Symphonie Concertante?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Top 3 worst UK exports: Mad-cow; Foot-and-mouth; Charlotte Church
IMCA
> Along these lines, I read an interesting story about Prokofiev and others
> attending a performance of SR playing Scriabin, a tribute concert I believe.
> As the story goes, most were very critical of SR's performance, saying while
> the score called for the music to soar, with SR each note stood firmly on
> the ground. Prokofiev knowing these criticisms went nonetheless to
> congratulate SR afterwards but did so in his usual awkward manner - "well,
> in spite of everything it went very well" (or some such), to which SR took
> great offense and the 2 did not speak for years.
>
Funny story, that! There are many like these amoong Russian pianists.
Neuhaus, too, was often a figure for derision by other pianists, as he
sometimes (it is reported) would play while intoxicated. (There was a
rivalry between Goldenweiser and Neuhaus, and several amusing stories
have long circulated about the relationship between them). Prokofiev,
by the way, was also an impressive Scriabin player, and even recorded
the Poeme Aile and the Prelude Op. 45 No. 3
As for the score to that particular prelude, the best evidence as to
Scriabin's intentions can be found within the score itself. There is
not a single accelerando indicated anywhere, something that Scriabin,
who was throughout his life a stickler for accuracy in notation so as
to convey his precise intentions --which precision is evident in
virtually every one of his works -- invariably took the trouble to
write down, in an effort to let the interpreter know exactly what he
was after. In fact, when he *did* want the player to convey a sense
soaring, or flight, he would always, without exception, and from the
beginning of his carerer, indicate as much specifically in writing,
with the words "con voglia" or "aile" or (in the margins of the
autograph scores at the Scriabin Musueum and elsewhere) "letit"-- the
Russian for "to fly". What's more he specifically writes the
entire prelude in the context of both piano and pianissimo -- with
only a single forte to be found at bar 31, which he immediately annuls
not even two bars later by reintroducing the prevailing dynamic of
pianissimo. To this he also adds the instruction "sotto voce".
Additionally he slurs over one and two bar units, a compositional
device which certainly lobbies against any kind of rubato that would
surge dynamically or accelerate suddenly, as it could have done had
he indicated, with equal specificity, had he written out long
phrases.Dynamic indications are themselves only sparsely indicated in
the score, suggesting unuusual restraint -- as Scriabin was certianly
never one to withold specific and abundant dynamic markings to make
himself clear! In fact, the metrical notation itself, codified as 2
against 3 and in carefully constructed beaming that likewise restricts
itself to one bar units, is essentially a written-out rubato; thuse,
there can be no mistake as to his intentions.
Of course, one could simply ignore the specific demands of the score
as Scriabin so carefully and pristinely noted them --which even if
interpreted a s a guide to the works' character rather than anything
to be slavishly or dogmatically dwelt upon(which wold be just as bad!)
-- would still argue persuasively against an interpretation that would
distort it into something so aggressive and rhapsodic, when its
intensity proceeds from a much subtler realm, i.e, a kind of
contained white heat, if you will, that simmers beneath the surface. I
sincerely doubt Prokofiev would have done anything to corrupt or
damage the work, judging from his pristinely respectful readings of
the Poeme Aile and the Prelude Op. 45 No. 3.
Rachmaninoff's interpretation strikes me as wholly legitimate as it
conforms so persuasively to what the composer himself has asked of his
interpreters: a certain quiescence born of melancholy, a kind of
burgeoning unease all codified so pristinely in Scriabin's own hand
-metrically, dynamicall, structurally and rhythmically -- and in such
a way as to allow the inner workings and relation ships of the
composition itslef --not the least of which is its relatively rapid
harmonic rhythm -- to state its own case with minimum interference
from the performer.
Rachmaninoff's performance is nothing if not melancholy; it is this
dimension of the work that he chooses to illuminate. However, I
suspect that Scriabin himself would have chosen to play it, as he
often did his own music, with a somewhat more improvisatory air
--gently and mysterious. On the other hand, a slightly faster tempo
would also change the atmosphere. Heinrich Neuhaus plays it
wonderfully, too, at a more elevated tempo -- but without rushing even
one iota, or engaging so much as a single accelerando, while
underplaying the duplets in the LH dynamically, that is, even quieter
than SR. But his more rapid tempo does indeed considerably heighten
its urgency.
John Bell Young
Dan Koren
> Simon Smith <sd...@cam.ac.uk> appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:67048d8f...@sds46.clare.cam.ac.uk:
>
> > In message <8N%w9.17081$bG.9948@rwcrnsc53>
> > "wayne dooley" <wrdo...@attbi.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Along these lines, I read an interesting story about Prokofiev and
> >> others attending a performance of SR playing Scriabin, a tribute
> >> concert I believe. As the story goes, most were very critical of SR's
> >> performance, saying while the score called for the music to soar,
> >> with SR each note stood firmly on the ground. Prokofiev knowing
> >> these criticisms went nonetheless to congratulate SR afterwards but
> >> did so in his usual awkward manner - "well, in spite of everything it
> >> went very well" (or some such), to which SR took great offense and
> >> the 2 did not speak for years.
> >
> > As I read it (which was some time ago, and I have a terrible memory)
> > it was SVR who was the more unpleasant:
> > Prokofiev: "Well, pet, you played it very well".
> > SVR: "And I suppose you expected me to play it badly?" [stalks off]
> >
> > Admittedly the "pet" was my editorial addition. I also got the
> > impression that they never talked at all after that, nor that they
> > ever had done in the past, but I could be wrong.
>
> Didn't Richter make his professional debut *conducting* Prokofiev's
> Symphonie Concertante?
And how did Richter get into this thread? The
discussion was about Rachmaninov, Scriabin and
Prokofiev.
dk
Dan Koren
>
> Funny story, that! There are many like these
> amoong Russian pianists. Neuhaus, too, was
> often a figure for derision by other pianists,
> as he sometimes (it is reported) would play
> while intoxicated.
I hope it wasn't suggested that Neuhaus had an
exclusive on playing intoxicated? :) That would
seem rather unlikely. BTW if memory serves his
son Stanislav had quite a reputation for this
(and other sins) too! :)
dk
Wayne Reimer
dank...@yahoo.com says...
And who among the listeners was sober enough to report on the
intoxication of the pianist(s), I wonder?
wr
Dan Koren
> Neuhaus, too, was often a figure for derision by other pianists, as he
> sometimes (it is reported) would play while intoxicated. (There was a
> rivalry between Goldenweiser and Neuhaus, and several amusing stories
> have long circulated about the relationship between them). Prokofiev,
> by the way, was also an impressive Scriabin player, and even recorded
> the Poeme Aile and the Prelude Op. 45 No. 3
>
I find it utterly fascinating to study the differences
between the Neuhaus and Goldenweiser piano (sub-)schools.
Goldenweiser was one of the most prolific piano teachers
in history, second only to Leschetizky in the number and
quality (breadth + depth) of the pianists he produced. He
had many more students than Neuhaus had, and he probably
was more disciplined and consistent in his approach. Many
of the top Russian pianists slightly less famous than the
Gilels/Richter/Sofronitsky troika came from his classes,
and his teaching career spanned almost as many decades as
Leschetizky's. He counted among his pupils Samuil Feinberg,
Yakov Fliyer, Lev Oborin, Yakov Zak, Vladimir Ashkenazy,
Viktor Merzhanov (now you probably understand the reason
for the 1945 first prize tie between Merzhanov and Richter
in the All Union Pianists' Competition -- he and Neuhaus
each had rights to a first prize!), Bella Davidovich, Lazar
Berman, Dmitri Bashkirov, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Nikolai
Petrov and many others. Goldenweiser was the Chair of
the Piano School at the Moscow Conservatory for well over
30 years until his death, and was apparently on better
terms with the Communist regime than either Neuhaus or
Konstantin Igumnov. The latter was the 3rd of the top
piano teachers in Moscow, and more classically focused
than the others. The most important of Igumnov's pupils
were probably Maria Grinberg and Alexander Uninsky.
The history of the Russian piano school alone is probably
richer and more varied than that of many small countries!
Interestingly, the St. Petersburg conservatory and its
traditions were sidelined to some extent following the
Communist revolution. Many of the top teachers there
either moved to Moscow (e.g. Felix Blumenfeld) or fled
to the West (e.g. Isabelle Vengerova). Today, the main
artists representing the St. Petersburg piano school
are Grigory Sokolov and Arkadi Volodos.
dk
Dirk A. Ronk
Thanks for an interesting and helpful post. I've been a big Richter
fan for years, have a great fondness for much of Gilels' work and a
growing appreciation for Sofronitsky, Yudina and others. I've also
collected several of the Russian Piano School CDs (Neuhaus,
Goldenweiser, Feinberg, Yudina, Pletnev, Grinburg, Nikolajewa). But
while I listen a good bit, I've never actually read many of the
accompanying booklets, let alone anything more extensive and/or
scholarly about the topic. I'm now feeling motivated to rectify that.
Meanwhile, I'll use your message as a quick-reference "family tree" of
the players in question, and start paying more attention to their
comparative playing styles.
Cheers,
Dirk
Steve Emerson
dank...@yahoo.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
> Many
> of the top Russian pianists slightly less famous than the
> Gilels/Richter/Sofronitsky troika came from his [Goldenweiser's] classes,
> and his teaching career spanned almost as many decades as
> Leschetizky's. He counted among his pupils Samuil Feinberg,
> Yakov Fliyer, Lev Oborin, Yakov Zak, Vladimir Ashkenazy,
> Viktor Merzhanov (now you probably understand the reason
> for the 1945 first prize tie between Merzhanov and Richter
> in the All Union Pianists' Competition -- he and Neuhaus
> each had rights to a first prize!), Bella Davidovich, Lazar
> Berman, Dmitri Bashkirov, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Nikolai
> Petrov and many others.
Thanks for this interesting post. I believe Nikolaeva was also a Goldenweiser
student; interesting in that she too taught numbers of people, among them
Koroliov.
SE.
IMCA
Yes, it's like studying the political history of a small country,all
right! Dan's survey here is an excellent and accurate introduction to
the ins and outs of the Soviet pianistic hierarchy. Each of these
pianist-teachers imbued his students with something unique and
recognizable, that is, with something that pegged them as students of
that particular professor. For example, Igumnov was well-known for the
warm and jewel-like tone he imparted to his students, another of whom
was the late Polish pianist Andrzej Wasowski. Amazingly, when
Margarita Fyodorova, a Neuhaus student, first heard a recording of
Wasowski in Chopin, she turned to me and asked, whithout knowing
anything about him other than his age and nationality pror to
listening, if he had been an Igumnov protege!
To the list of St Petersburg pianists representative of the traditions
there (and Sofronitsky, a student of Nikolayev, also came out of that
tradition) I would add the name Ekaterina Murina (born 1938) , an
absolutely splendid pianist teaching at the St Petersburg
Conservatory, who has never performed in the US, though she has played
in the UK.
John Bell Young
IMCA
The KGB, no doubt!
John Bell Young
Jan Winter
>The most important of Igumnov's pupils
>were probably Maria Grinberg and Alexander Uninsky.
>
>The history of the Russian piano school alone is probably
>richer and more varied than that of many small countries!
And also based on long stretched traditions, considering that another
Igumnov pupil was Alexei Stanchinsky (1888-1914) who, if his
compositions are a reflection of his abilities, must have been a very
remarkable pianist. Those people taught for dozens of years.
Btw another Goldenweiser pupil: Ginsburg.
--
Jan Winter, Amsterdam
(j.wi...@xs4all.nl)
"Real jazz is classical music now" (Kenny Clarke)
Mark Katznelson
to play concerts for support of family Scriabin. Prokofiev (just
graduated school!) came and was rude, said "your Scriabin wasn't that
bad"
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
Dan Koren wrote:
>
>
> I find it utterly fascinating to study the differences
> between the Neuhaus and Goldenweiser piano (sub-)schools.
>
> Goldenweiser was one of the most prolific piano teachers
> in history, second only to Leschetizky in the number and
> quality (breadth + depth) of the pianists he produced. He
> had many more students than Neuhaus had, and he probably
> was more disciplined and consistent in his approach.
In this intriguing but quite artificial and badly defined (number +
(why not "X" instead of "+" ?) quality of the pupils) contest I
believe Goldenweiser yields the palm to Neuhaus. In any rate the former
barely wins.
No objection regarding the differences in approach to teaching.
> Many
> of the top Russian pianists slightly less famous than the
> Gilels/Richter/Sofronitsky troika came from his classes,
> and his teaching career spanned almost as many decades as
> Leschetizky's. He counted among his pupils Samuil Feinberg,
> Yakov Fliyer, Lev Oborin, Yakov Zak, Vladimir Ashkenazy,
> Viktor Merzhanov
(now you probably understand the reason
> for the 1945 first prize tie between Merzhanov and Richter
> in the All Union Pianists' Competition -- he and Neuhaus
> each had rights to a first prize!), Bella Davidovich, Lazar
> Berman, Dmitri Bashkirov, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Nikolai
> Petrov and many others.
First of all Grigory Ginzburg should be mentioned among "many others"
[not mentioning GG must've been a mere memory slip of DK], actually his
name should be put right after Feinberg's. GG grew up in the AG's family
and perhaps is a more consistent successor of AG than SF. SF felt
himself rather tight in AG's aesthetic paradigm since his youth
(nonetheless both respected each other a lot despite a certain stiffness
in their relations lasted for some years).
And do not forget Tatiana Nikolayeva and Roza Tamarkina!
Now I can't help correcting a few occasional inaccuracies.
Among the listed above only Feinberg and Bashkirov are pupils of
Goldenweiser!
here is a "pedigree" for the rest of the list
Samuil Feinberg,
Viktor Merzhanov
Konstantin Igumnov
Yakov Milshtein
Elisabeth Leonskaja
Lazar Berman
Yakov Fliyer
Bella Davidovich
Lev Oborin
Vladimir Ashkenazy
Heinrich Neuhaus
Yakov Zak
Nikolai Petrov
> Goldenweiser was the Chair of
> the Piano School at the Moscow Conservatory for well over
> 30 years until his death, and was apparently on better
> terms with the Communist regime than either Neuhaus or
> Konstantin Igumnov.
One might think AG sincerely confessed communism... (-:
> The latter was the 3rd of the top
> piano teachers in Moscow, and more classically focused
> than the others. The most important of Igumnov's pupils
> were probably Maria Grinberg and Alexander Uninsky.
Yes for Grinberg (who "started" with Bluemenfeld) but I get used to
think that Uninsky graduated from Kiev Cons where he studied with
Tarnovsky (a Horowitz' teacher)
>
> The history of the Russian piano school alone is probably
> richer and more varied than that of many small countries!
>
Indeed!
Boris
Dan Koren
I believe this is incorrect. AFAIK Tatiana Nikolaeva was one
of Leonid (Lev) Nikolaiyev's students (no relationship). He
was also Sofronitsky's teacher, although his first teacher
Alexander Michalowicz arguably had a much greater influence
on his development. Somewhere in a remote corner of my brain
there is a notion/recollection that Sofronitsky also studied
with Blumenfeld -- which I got from a book about the Russian
piano school I read a very long time ago ('60s) -- but I have
not been able to find any supporting evidence.
dk
Dan Koren
> Wayne Reimer <wr...@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:<MPG.18326d5e3...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>...
> > In article <c1c5ead9.02110...@posting.google.com>,
> > dank...@yahoo.com says...
> > > im...@tampabay.rr.com (IMCA) wrote in message news:<448889ba.02110...@posting.google.com>...
> > > >
> > > > Funny story, that! There are many like these
> > > > amoong Russian pianists. Neuhaus, too, was
> > > > often a figure for derision by other pianists,
> > > > as he sometimes (it is reported) would play
> > > > while intoxicated.
> > >
> > > I hope it wasn't suggested that Neuhaus had an
> > > exclusive on playing intoxicated? :) That would
> > > seem rather unlikely. BTW if memory serves his
> > > son Stanislav had quite a reputation for this
> > > (and other sins) too! :)
> > >
> > >
> > > dk
> > >
> >
> > And who among the listeners was sober enough to report on the
> > intoxication of the pianist(s), I wonder?
> >
>
Would you trust the KGB were sober? :)
dk
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
Dan Koren wrote:
>
> Steve Emerson <seme...@dnai.com> wrote in message news:<semerson-E8678D...@241.in-addr.mrf.va.news.rcn.net>...
> >
> > Thanks for this interesting post. I believe Nikolaeva was also a Goldenweiser
> > student; interesting in that she too taught numbers of people, among them
> > Koroliov.
> >
>
> I believe this is incorrect. AFAIK Tatiana Nikolaeva was one
> of Leonid (Lev) Nikolaiyev's students (no relationship).
No Dan, Steve is correct. Leonid Nikolayev (Lev sounds rather odd...)
taught in Leningrad and died in 1942 (having been evacuated to Soviet
Middle Asia, IIRC) while Nikolayeva graduated from Moscow Cons in 1947
(she was 23)
> He
> was also Sofronitsky's teacher, although his first teacher
> Alexander Michalowicz arguably had a much greater influence
> on his development. Somewhere in a remote corner of my brain
> there is a notion/recollection that Sofronitsky also studied
> with Blumenfeld -- which I got from a book about the Russian
> piano school I read a very long time ago ('60s) -- but I have
> not been able to find any supporting evidence.
There were rumors Yudina (Sofronitsky's classmate at the class of
Nikolayev) took private lessons from Bluemenfeld while I can't recall
anything like that regarding VS. They - FB and VS - definitely knew each
other since VS once referred to a FB's story on Rubinstein
best
boris
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
Dan Koren wrote:
>
> im...@tampabay.rr.com (IMCA) wrote in message news:<448889ba.02110...@posting.google.com>...
> > Wayne Reimer <wr...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> > >
> > > And who among the listeners was sober enough to report on the
> > > intoxication of the pianist(s), I wonder?
> > >
> >
> > The KGB, no doubt!
>
> Would you trust the KGB were sober? :)
>
> dk
As soon as this subtle topic has been brought up here is a story
[slightly OT, because it deals with violin rather than piano....]
Viktor Pikaizen claimed that his best reading of Chaconne happened once
upon a time in a hotel while his touring somewhere in a province of the
former SU. He got up early morning and was going to shave himself. When
he put the plug of the electric razor into the socket the latter fell
out from the wall and as a result a mike which had been embedded in the
hole shamelessly revealed... Then he took his violin, moved closer to
the mike and announced aloud:
Bach!
Chaconne!!
....and started playing.....
Cheers,
Boris
Matthew B. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:3DCB8F50.68838A0A@_PSAM_mail.kar.net:
> As soon as this subtle topic has been brought up here is a story
> [slightly OT, because it deals with violin rather than piano....]
>
> Viktor Pikaizen claimed that his best reading of Chaconne happened
> once upon a time in a hotel while his touring somewhere in a province
> of the former SU. He got up early morning and was going to shave
> himself. When he put the plug of the electric razor into the socket
> the latter fell out from the wall and as a result a mike which had
> been embedded in the hole shamelessly revealed... Then he took his
> violin, moved closer to the mike and announced aloud:
>
> Bach!
>
> Chaconne!!
>
>
> ....and started playing.....
Was there a reaction from the audience?
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
"Matthew B. Tepper" wrote:
>
> derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in news:3DCB8F50.68838A0A@_PSAM_mail.kar.net:
>
> > As soon as this subtle topic has been brought up here is a story
> > [slightly OT, because it deals with violin rather than piano....]
> >
> > Viktor Pikaizen claimed that his best reading of Chaconne happened
> > once upon a time in a hotel while his touring somewhere in a province
> > of the former SU. He got up early morning and was going to shave
> > himself. When he put the plug of the electric razor into the socket
> > the latter fell out from the wall and as a result a mike which had
> > been embedded in the hole shamelessly revealed... Then he took his
> > violin, moved closer to the mike and announced aloud:
> >
> > Bach!
> >
> > Chaconne!!
> >
> >
> > ....and started playing.....
>
> Was there a reaction from the audience?
>
Yes, sure! They waited till Pikaizen left the room and repaired the
socket.
boris
>
Dan Koren
> On 6 Nov 2002 23:44:26 -0800, dank...@yahoo.com (Dan Koren) wrote:
>
> >The most important of Igumnov's pupils
> >were probably Maria Grinberg and Alexander Uninsky.
> >
> >The history of the Russian piano school alone is probably
> >richer and more varied than that of many small countries!
>
> And also based on long stretched traditions, considering that another
> Igumnov pupil was Alexei Stanchinsky (1888-1914) who, if his
> compositions are a reflection of his abilities, must have been a very
> remarkable pianist. Those people taught for dozens of years.
>
> Btw another Goldenweiser pupil: Ginsburg.
Yes! I realized I had omitted him just as I
hit "enter" to post my earlier article! :)
dk
Alan Cooper
> dank...@yahoo.com (Dan Koren) wrote in message news:<c1c5ead9.02110...@posting.google.com>...
> > I find it utterly fascinating to study the differences
> > between the Neuhaus and Goldenweiser piano (sub-)schools.
> Yes, it's like studying the political history of a small country,all
> right! Dan's survey here is an excellent and accurate introduction to
> the ins and outs of the Soviet pianistic hierarchy. Each of these
> pianist-teachers imbued his students with something unique and
> recognizable, that is, with something that pegged them as students of
> that particular professor. For example, Igumnov was well-known for the
> warm and jewel-like tone he imparted to his students, another of whom
> was the late Polish pianist Andrzej Wasowski. Amazingly, when
> Margarita Fyodorova, a Neuhaus student, first heard a recording of
> Wasowski in Chopin, she turned to me and asked, whithout knowing
> anything about him other than his age and nationality pror to
> listening, if he had been an Igumnov protege!
I don't know how other rmcr regulars feel, but I think that this
thread is the most interesting one that I've read in months. Thanks
especially to Dan, John, and Boris! I would love to see further
elaboration of the main point that Dan and John allude to above,
namely the way different pedagogical styles yield recognizable
differences in the way the artists sound. I would especially
appreciate recommendations of specific recordings that manifest these
distinctive qualities, with some guidelines concerning what to listen
for. It must be amazing to listen to a recording of a pianist and be
able to say that you know who taught him / her. But I since can do
that sort of thing in my own field, I'm not surprised that musicians
can do it in theirs.
Many thanks, AC
IMCA
>
>
> Now I can't help correcting a few occasional inaccuracies.
> Among the listed above only Feinberg and Bashkirov are pupils of
> Goldenweiser!
>
> here is a "pedigree" for the rest of the list
>
>
> Samuil Feinberg,
> Viktor Merzhanov
>
>
> Konstantin Igumnov
> Yakov Milshtein
> Elisabeth Leonskaja
> Lazar Berman
> Yakov Fliyer
> Bella Davidovich
> Lev Oborin
> Vladimir Ashkenazy
>
>
> Heinrich Neuhaus
> Yakov Zak
> Nikolai Petrov
>
> > The history of the Russian piano school alone is probably
> > richer and more varied than that of many small countries!
> >
> Indeed!
>
> Boris
Valuable corrections an observations from Boris, who obviously knows
his stuff. I might add that, if anyone has any specific quiestions as
to the pedigree of Russian and Soviet era pianists, just ask: I have
in my possession a couple of thorough reference guides, including
Grigoriev-Platek's "Sovremenniye Pianisti", which covers most Russian
pianists, and then some, with biographical and other professinal
information.
John Bell Young
IMCA
LOL! ASbsolutely not!, In fact, here's an amusing story that Fyodorova
told me:
On her first visit to the west, in Germany, back in 1951 or '52, when
she placed second in the International Bach Competition at Leipzig
(Nikolyaeva took first prize, Demus third, with Shostakovich on the
jury), the KGB had, as usual, assigned an agent to accompany the
Soviet pianists.
Seems that the agent assigned to Fyodorova had a little too much to
drink, and forgot about her, returning to Moscow without her.
Naturally, the Soviet authorities blamed the incident on Fyodorova,
rather than accepting responsiblity for one of their own. After that,
they made it very difficult for her to perform outside of Soviet
territory, which is one of the reasons she was not allowed to play in
the USA until 1991, well after perestroika.
John Bell Young
>
> dk
LaVirtuosa
"You all play Bach with too much feeling. That is poetry of the past
century and not the over-strained nervousness of our day. Yes, that
is poetry. You will only comprehend that when you have studied at
least 10 fugues by Bach..."
"He who can not sing is not a musician"
[Emphasizing correct choice of metrical pulse]"At what tempo are we
conducting?"
"Rhythm in music is the pulstion that indicates life".
"When you learn, you do not play with the intellect; work with it!
The intellect is used up by frequent playing from beginning to end
wiht full intensity; therefore, one should use the emotional powers
sparingly".
[To Joseph Hofmann] "To the devil with all this pedagogy! You have to
be independent!"
***************Val [above quotes are from Clavier Dec. 1992]
derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net wrote in message news:<3DCB8374.3154E71@_PSAM_mail.kar.net>...
Sonarrat Citalis
> Funny story, that! There are many like these amoong Russian pianists.
> Neuhaus, too, was often a figure for derision by other pianists, as he
> sometimes (it is reported) would play while intoxicated.
As much as I wanted to like it, that's the impression I got from a
recording of the Scriabin Concerto. Your teacher's performance is
still the best I've heard by miles.
-Sonarrat.
STAVROS
? "IMCA" <im...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> Valuable corrections an observations from Boris, who obviously knows
> his stuff. I might add that, if anyone has any specific quiestions as
> to the pedigree of Russian and Soviet era pianists, just ask: I have
> in my possession a couple of thorough reference guides, including
> Grigoriev-Platek's "Sovremenniye Pianisti", which covers most Russian
> pianists, and then some, with biographical and other professinal
> information.
>
> John Bell Young
Perhaps you could help me in this: I have a Meloodya double LP set "Pupils
of Blumenfeld"! In this among Barere,Horowitz and Grinberg is a pianist
named Vladimir Belov! He plays 3 studies of Blumenfled ,the op.14,
theconcert study op.24 and the famous left hand study op.36! What a
playing!!! He plays them with a feeling and passion second to none!! Who is
he? Any biografical info? Any idea of where we can find any other recordings
of him?
Thank in advance!!
All the best
Stavros
vladimir
>Dan Koren wrote:
>> of the top Russian pianists slightly less famous than the
>> Gilels/Richter/Sofronitsky troika came from his classes,
. . . . .
>> each had rights to a first prize!), Bella Davidovich, Lazar
>> Berman, Dmitri Bashkirov, Elisabeth Leonskaja, Nikolai
>
>Among the listed above only Feinberg and Bashkirov are pupils of
>Goldenweiser!
>
>here is a "pedigree" for the rest of the list
>
>Konstantin Igumnov
> Yakov Milshtein
> Elisabeth Leonskaja
> Lazar Berman
But, in the book "Russia's Great Modern Pianists", by Mark Zilberquit,
Berman is quoted extensively concerning his studies with Goldenweiser. One
example "The nearly twenty years that I worked under Goldenweiser's
supervision generally proved to be decisive for me. In fact I did not have
any other pedagogue." Later, Berman amends this to indicate that during the
war he was evacuated from Moscow, but Goldenweiser stayed; during that time
Berman studied with Theodore Gutmann.
- Phil Caron
vladimir
- Phil Caron
derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net wrote in message
Samir Golescu
On Sat, 9 Nov 2002, STAVROS wrote:
> Perhaps you could help me in this: I have a Meloodya double LP set "Pupils
> of Blumenfeld"! In this among Barere,Horowitz and Grinberg is a pianist
> named Vladimir Belov! He plays 3 studies of Blumenfled ,the op.14,
> theconcert study op.24 and the famous left hand study op.36! What a
> playing!!! He plays them with a feeling and passion second to none!! Who is
> he? Any biografical info? Any idea of where we can find any other recordings
> of him?
Not to help, but to confirm you. I know those Belov recordings. They are
absolutely terrific. The famed Left Hand Blumenfeld Etude leaves far, far
behind in the dust all the other recorded performances I know (well, I
heard only 5 pianists in it. . .). The F sharp minor "Chords etude", the
combination between the beautiful Rachmaninoff-like piece and the
immaculately voiced performance, is a true gem. I do associate my voice
to your inquiry. Belov is one of the best pianists almost nobody heard of
indeed.
regards,
SG
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
vladimir wrote:
>
> But, in the book "Russia's Great Modern Pianists", by Mark Zilberquit,
> Berman is quoted extensively concerning his studies with Goldenweiser.
Yes, Phil, you and Mark Zilberquit are right. We have to give back
Berman to Goldenweiser! (-:
As Dan has pointed out "the history of the Russian piano school alone is
probably
richer and more varied than that of many small countries!". And it is
hard to draw a map of the country from memory without errors.
However sometimes pupils "betrayed" their "competing" teachers who
feigned that they liked that (-:
E.g. Rosa Tamarkina "polished" her mastery with Igumnov.
Boris
Wayne Reimer
derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net says...
engaged in eavesdropping, and the other half was "performing" for those
listeners. Sort of what J. Ashcroft has in mind for the U.S., I
understand.
wr
STAVROS
? "Samir Golescu" <gol...@uiuc.edu> ?????? ??? ??????
news:Pine.GSO.4.31.021108...@ux8.cso.uiuc.edu...
Dear Samir
You said perfect what my feelings are after listening to these 2 studies!! I
totally agree with you!!The best left handed study of all the other recorded
performances I know too! And also the best recording of the "chords etude"!
What a tension he gives in the polyphonic finally you describe above!! By
the way ,the only thing I know about him is that he has edited the score of
the complete Blumenfeld etudes in Russian.(I happen to have it) He has done
a very detail work(fingering etc.) Anybody else know anything about him?
All the best
Stavros
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
> the complete Blumenfeld etudes in Russian.(I happen to have it) He has done
> a very detail work(fingering etc.) Anybody else know anything about him?
>
> All the best
> Stavros
He also edited Liszt, Chopin as well as many collections of pedagogical
material. Also he made a number of concert arrangements.
I am afraid you can barely find a more complete review of his life and
works than you have already mentioned - the sleeves for the 2LP set you
have (M10 49425-8).
Vladimir Sergeyevich Belov (1906-89) was born in Kirzhach, Vladimir
region. Studied with a pupil of Yesipova (oops!, Essipoff) in Simbirsk.
Entered Moscow Cons. in 1922 (S.A. Kozlovsky). In 1924 left Kozlovsky
for Blumenfeld. Having graduated from the Cons he was appointed senior
assistance of Blumenfeld in 1929. He led the Blumenfeld class after FB
death in 1931 helping the last FB pupil to accomplish the course (Maria
Grinberg was among them). Then in the fall 1931 he was appointed the
same position on the chair of Felix Blumenfeld's nephew. (Assistant
professor - docent sp? - since 1935). Heinrich Neuhaus committed him to
guide his son Stanislav (significantly (to me at least ) that he taught
piano such avant-garde composers as Edison Denisov and Andre[y]
Volkonsky!)
Had I had some more time I would have translated the rest into *my*
English. However , again this biography is rather scarce.
In the Rostopchina brochure on FMB a Belov's speech on his teacher
(1947) is quoted several times. Sleeves also hint at existence of Belov
memoirs (manuscript)
Boris
Ramon Khalona
I am skeptical about how far this sort of "pedagogical attribution"
would take you. My guess is that if you can tell X is a pupil of Y it
would be because
you are listening to an early recording of X, when his/her
interpretive personality was not sufficiently defined. Who could say
that late Richter (perhaps even early Richter!) was a Neuhaus pupil?
My guess is that the more oustanding a pupil, the more he/she would
differ from his/her teacher, even though there are some teaching
principles that will probably always stay with them.
RK
Jan Winter
>My guess is that the more oustanding a pupil, the more he/she would
>differ from his/her teacher, even though there are some teaching
>principles that will probably always stay with them.
But maybe one could also say the more outstanding the teacher, the
more he is able to guide the pupil in finding and developing his own
style, presupposing of course there *is* in the pupil a style to find
and develop. On this level teaching - learning is a two way street.
IMCA
> amco...@ix.netcom.com (Alan Cooper) wrote in message news:<6c4429c.02110...@posting.google.com>...
> > im...@tampabay.rr.com (IMCA) wrote in message news:<448889ba.02110...@posting.google.com>...
> > > dank...@yahoo.com (Dan Koren) wrote in message news:<c1c5ead9.02110...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > > > I find it utterly fascinating to study the differences
> > > > between the Neuhaus and Goldenweiser piano (sub-)schools.
>
> > >
> >
> > thread is the most interesting one that I've read in months. Thanks
> > especially to Dan, John, and Boris! I would love to see further
> > elaboration of the main point that Dan and John allude to above,
> > namely the way different pedagogical styles yield recognizable
> > differences in the way the artists sound. I would especially
> > appreciate recommendations of specific recordings that manifest these
> > distinctive qualities, with some guidelines concerning what to listen
> > for. It must be amazing to listen to a recording of a pianist and be
> > able to say that you know who taught him / her. But I since can do
> > that sort of thing in my own field, I'm not surprised that musicians
> > can do it in theirs.
>
> I am skeptical about how far this sort of "pedagogical attribution"
> would take you. My guess is that if you can tell X is a pupil of Y it
> would be because
> you are listening to an early recording of X, when his/her
> interpretive personality was not sufficiently defined. Who could say
> that late Richter (perhaps even early Richter!) was a Neuhaus pupil?
> My guess is that the more oustanding a pupil, the more he/she would
> differ from his/her teacher, even though there are some teaching
> principles that will probably always stay with them.
>
> RK
Yes, there is certainly a lot of truth to what you say. Didn't someone
once say, in fact, that the greatest flattery a student can pay his
teacher is to leave him? Richter, who was already mature, musically
well-formed and an adult when he came to Neuhaus, sounded nothing
like Neuhaus, and the same can be said for many other pianists and
their teachers.
That said, there are certain traditions (principals, as you so rightly
point out) and approaches to problem solving, if you will, that a
teacher hands down to his students. Sometimes that can be a way of
producing tone, etc., where you might find real similarities between
teacher and student. To give you a simple example, from my own
experience, in just some basic technical areas, Fyodorova gave me a
great deal of information, which was given her by her teacher,
Neuhaus, about such things as playing leaps and glissandi in a
specific way, as well as information about tone production, how to
practice, how to build a musical climax etc. Of course, other
teachers and pianists no less authoratative, had given me equally
valuable, though different information over the years. Evenutally one
processes and synthesizes all this data and uses it accordingly and
appropriately. It is up to each of us to interpret and cultivate it in
our own idiosyncratic, but informed way, subject to our own unique set
of experiences, our particular manner of analyzing and listening, and
the way in which we relate to music. The information is often
objective and specific; what we do with it is also subjective, but not
arbitrary.
This leads me to an interesting point, which just came up in
conversation the other day. While I do beleive it is very important to
stick with a single teacher , especially early on in life, for as long
as possible (providing the teacher is a very good one, and can steer
you musically in the right direction) I cannot agree with those
teachers who tend to covet their students for life, a la the fictional
Madame Souzatzka -- and indeed, there really are such people in real
life. Just the other day, the parents of an immensely talented young
kid I heard a couple of years ago contacted me to ask my advice about
teachers, now that the boy is getting ready to choose a college or
conservatory. I offered some names. But then I told them that one of
the great pianists on this planet, Dag Achatz, was playing in Boston,
where they live, that week, and that it would be terriffic if their
son could play for him. I offered to arrange it. When his current
teacher (a very good one, by the way, a Russian emigre), who he had
studied with exlcusively all his life learned about this she became
concerned that he "wasn't ready" to play for Dag. she didn't think it
was such a good idea. In realty, she just didn't want to let him go,
something that she is going to have to face sooner or later. So I
respectfully disagreed, having heard the boy in competition, and
knowing full well his extraordinary capabilities. In fact, the best
time for someone like him to play for a prominent artist is when they
are *not* entirely ready, or learning new material. It's a very good
way for the teacher to sort out their strengths and weaknesses, to
speak nothing of the unique opportunities, in so many ways--musical
and extra-musical -- it presents the young pianist. Dag heard the boy,
and concurred with my opinion as to his very deep talent, and offered
to help him secure a place at his class at the Conservatoire de
Geneve, a marvelous option he would not have enjoyed otherwise.
In my view, there is nothing more valuable then culling as much
information as possible from reliable and authoratative sources: from
teachers, musicians of every instrument, conductors, theorists, books,
etc. I have found that most young people who are seriously studying
music, with a view towards a concert career, are on the whole
exceptionally serious and intelligent individuals who are perfectly
capable of sorting out and analyzing information for themselves, and
not simply allowing themselves to become parrots.The best students ask
questions, and a lot of them; they don't necessarily assume that the
information they are being given is the only information available, or
even the best; but even so, the smartest among them will examine and
experiment with whatever they learn, to see if it works for them and
how they might put it to use. Learning something as complex and
challenging as classical music requires a teacher student relationship
that is based on trust, honesty and lots of criticism. That's true, I
think,in any artistic discipline. Some students can take the
criticism, and understand its function and value, while others cannot,
taking it all much too personally and putting up walls to learning.
The former usually excel, while the latter continue to experience
problems. That said, the teacher, too, has a responsibility to level
criticism in such a way that is at once friendly and communicative,
not condescending and dismissive. There are ways to do that which work
very well indeed. But when faced with a teacher such as one very
famous super-star pianist I observed once in a master class, who told
a young student that she would be better off having babies than
attempting to learn the piano, that is unacceptable behavior, and even
worse teaching -- which is certainly no fault of the student. Indeed,
I would advise any student who experiences anything like that to
simply get up and leave the room, and file a complaint with the host
institution.
Though there are many ways to navigate around the instrument, it very
well may be that the manner in which an artist chooses to do something
will affect his sound and rhythm, and the very manner in which he
characterizes a motive or a phrase.
John Bell Young
IMCA
Hmm... this name is not included in the Grigoriev-Platek. I tried to
find it, too , in some other reference maerials, including Tsipin's
book,and in neuhaus's autobigrophy, but came up empty. Let me try
another route. Fyodorova will know. I will email her to get the info
and get back to you. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
John Bell Young
STAVROS
? "IMCA" <im...@tampabay.rr.com> ?????? ??? ??????
news:448889ba.02110...@posting.google.com...
"Pupils
> > of Blumenfeld"! In this among Barere,Horowitz and Grinberg is a pianist
> > named Vladimir Belov! He plays 3 studies of Blumenfled ,the op.14,
> > theconcert study op.24 and the famous left hand study op.36! What a
> > playing!!! He plays them with a feeling and passion second to none!! Who
is
> > he? Any biografical info? Any idea of where we can find any other
recordings
> > of him?
> > Thank in advance!!
> >
> > All the best
> > Stavros
>
> Hmm... this name is not included in the Grigoriev-Platek. I tried to
> find it, too , in some other reference maerials, including Tsipin's
> book,and in neuhaus's autobigrophy, but came up empty. Let me try
> another route. Fyodorova will know. I will email her to get the info
> and get back to you. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
>
> John Bell Young
Don't thank me! I did nothing!
I thank you for your interest!! You help is priceless!!!Please ask her also
if there are any recordings existing!
All the best
stavros
STAVROS
? <derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net> ?????? ??? ??????
news:3DCDAA20.D23C0842@_PSAM_mail.kar.net...
Very very interesting infos!!! Thank you very much for your efford and
translation!! If
you find some time and translate anything more(in "your" english:-) -really
very good ones!) please post them!
All the best
Stavros
LaVirtuosa
Neuhaus, I believe, with photos. I tend to side with Anton
Rubinstein's comment about being independent--going a step further to
say that when a Great One comes along, the teacher must be
overshadowed--even crushed by the student!!! Or, looking at it another
way, the best teacher "wants" his student to crush him.
*************Val
derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net wrote in message news:<3DCCECB2.1E24C6EC@_PSAM_mail.kar.net>...
IMCA
> >
> > But, in the book "Russia's Great Modern Pianists", by Mark Zilberquit,
> > Berman is quoted extensively concerning his studies with Goldenweiser.
>
>
> Yes, Phil, you and Mark Zilberquit are right. We have to give back
> Berman to Goldenweiser! (-:
> As Dan has pointed out "the history of the Russian piano school alone is
> probably
> richer and more varied than that of many small countries!".
Actually, those are my words!
> It is hard to draw a map of the country from memory without errors.
That's for sure.
> However sometimes pupils "betrayed" their "competing" teachers who
> feigned that they liked that (-:
> E.g. Rosa Tamarkina "polished" her mastery with Igumnov.
Yes, there are probably hundreds of stories like that. Typical!
John Bell Young
derma...@_psam_mail.kar.net
IMCA wrote:
>
> derman_NO_@_PSAM_mail.kar.net wrote in message news:<3DCCECB2.1E24C6EC@_PSAM_mail.kar.net>...
> > As Dan has pointed out "the history of the Russian piano school alone is
> > probably
> > richer and more varied than that of many small countries!".
>
> Actually, those are my words!
I am sorry , John: I quoted DK
<c1c5ead9.02110...@posting.google.com>) while he didn't refer
to you.... (-: I myself didn't trace back the whole thread.
Or is it a way to express your full consent with that simile?
Alas I barely can match real English discourse and guess right the real
intents...
Regards
Boris
migrai...@msn.com
Belov was a great pianist, but isn't well known probably because he
stopped performing before they started recording extensively in Russia.
He once had a blackout (stopped playing) on stage, and from that day
left the stage and dedicated himself solely to teaching. He was a quiet
and very modest type. Anyway, I just heard that fantastic
Blumenfeld-school record which my teacher gave me (he studied under
Belov), and I'm pretty sure there are no other recordings of him
...shame.
cheers