Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli - Brahms: Variations on a theme by Paganini, Op. 35 (live in Lugano)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 тра 2012
- Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli, piano.
Recorded live in Lugano, Teatro Apollo (Kursaal), 21st May 1973.
1. Book I, Variation 1;
2. Book I, Variation 2;
3. Book I, Variation 3;
4. Book I, Variation 4;
5. Book I, Variation 5;
6. Book I, Variation 6;
7. Book I, Variation 7;
8. Book I, Variation 8;
9. Book I, Variation 9;
10. Book I, Variation 10;
11. Book I, Variation 11 (Andante);
12. Book I, Variation 12;
13. Book II, Variation 1;
14. Book II, Variation 2 (Poco animato);
15. Book II, Variation 5;
16. Book II, Variation 6 (Poco più vivace);
17. Book II, Variation 7;
18. Book II, Variation 8 (Allegro);
19. Book II, Variation 10 (Feroce, energico);
20. Book II, Variation 12 (Un poco andante);
21. Book II, Variation 13 (Un poco più andante);
22. Book II, Variation 3;
23. Book II, Variation 4 (Poco allegretto);
24. Book I, Variation 13;
25. Book I, Variation 14 (Presto, ma non troppo).
Ho passato la mattina ad ascoltare varie esecuzioni delle Variazioni.
Benedetti Michelangeli per forza, chiarezza, dinamismo, timbrica e sentimento si pone al vertice.
It is just insane how this is a live recording.
Greatest musical artist.
This recording is simply wonderful. Michelangeli was a fantastic pianist, and we have a true measure of how great he was with this live performance and unfortunately at times now forgotten or overshadowed by the note players of today that will not be players of note in subsequent decades. We can all argue about which pianist is 'best' but in my opinion this is the penultimate. It is noteworthy of his immense talent that he mixed up the order of the variations which was and in my opinion is still very much acceptable and most welcomed. Of course the global competition cult has killed anything that deviates from the printed page order...unfortunately.
MICHELANGELI !!!!!!!!
I find the changing tempo in the 2nd variation strange, but variation #3 is amazing!
The greatest!
Not True! ABM was the Cyborg Human machine! ABM played the second-rated piano concertos like Mozart no 13 Liszt no 1 Haydn G major! ABM never played the best piano concertos like Brahms 1-2 Chopin 1-2 Prokofiev 1-3 Rachmaninov 1-3 Saint-Saens no 2 Tchaikovsky no 1 JS Bach 1052! The greatest are Really=Artur Rubinstein( The God!) Sviatoslav Richter( The Genius) Grigory Sokolov( The Giant of Piano! The Titan of Piano!) Wilhelm Kempff( The most beautiful piano sound!) Rafu Lupu( The most colorful piano sound!) Solomon Cutnet( Best structure for music!)
Best version ever imho.
Unfortunate that there is no sound between 5.22-6.04?
why ?
❣
Так прочувствовать Паганини как это
сделали Брамс и Микеланджели и до
и после них никто не сможет ❤
О будущем не загадываем, но у АБМ это действительно полнейшее "попадание", как ни у кого.
Mio Dio....
Artista notável.
♥️🙏
16:47 - “gypsy”, with difficult glissandi
7:28 Music box No one voices this like Michelangeli. Please click so it becomes most replayed
sorry the order of this is all out of goose and a lot of things missing, i do hope there is a satisfactory explanation
Il y a un bug a 5:22 ?
there was a time before michelangeli
and there is a time after michelangeli
and inbetween - the epiphany of music.........
Dunno, his Chopin leaves a lot to be desired. His Ravel, though...it's sensational.
Cameron Yule My opinion: When we are speaking about such a high level of technical and artistic perfection, at the end it is only a matter of taste..
marmasiotis not to mention his Scarlatti
9:27
He skipped one!
wonder why?
Already the manner of playing the theme...un Paganini like...😢
I agree with you, but I think that also Cziffra's performance is technically perfect.
puffo3600 Imo, michelangeli and Cziffra are the two most outstanding pianists ever.
Forse richter non capiva molto di pianoforte perche' affermava che nessuno(compreso lui) suonasse meglio di gilels le variazioni di brahms paganini
@@francodegrandis870 Qualcuno disse: de gustibus non disputandum est. Comunque chi incide un brano non lo fa per essere migliore degli altri (almeno spero) ma per far sentire la propria versione, che può piacere o no.
Quelli che vagano su youtube cercando "il migliore" oppure idolatrando qualcuno perché "è il migliore" allora potrebbero darsi a seguire l'atletica: si sa chi è il centometrista più veloce, ci sono i record per chi è saltato più in alto con l'asta, c'è il maratoneta più veloce ecc. Ma togliete fuori dalla musica queste "gare". Dite: "Io preferisco Tizio", e non "Tizio è più bravo di Caio", oppure: "Sempronio è il più bravo di sempre"...
@@umegghju forse non mi sono spiegato,non io ma Sviatoslav richter disse questi(vedi scritti e biografie) mi sembrava giusto ricordarlo a chi non lo sapesse e non io ma giseking casadesus von sauer feinberg rubinstein e ora non ricordo piu' chi altri,all'unamita' al concorso di bruxelles del 1938 dichiararono all' ,unanimita' Golels vincitore e nonMichelangeli,questo lo dico per la cronaca,poi io posso preferire venti altri pianisti,e come tutti ho e abbiamo il diritto e la liberta' di sentirci piu' vicini ad un interprete che ad un altro ,o,viceversa,la musica non e' una scienza esatta e tutto e' discutibile,ci fosse una verita' assoluta non avremmo da non so quanti anni piu' bisogno di nuove o diverse interpretazioni, il mio era un commento proprio a questo riguardo ,che quello che puo' sembrare il migliore,il perfetto.l'assoluto,da qualche mediocre musicista(elencati prima) ci possano essere idee un po' diverse...tutto qui'
@@francodegrandis870 mi pare che ti contraddici, dicendo che non c'è una verità assoluta e allo stesso tempo sostenendo che c'è una verità assoluta. In quel concorso comunque c'era un concerto inedito da imparare in 2 settimane, che fu quello che mise in difficoltà Michelangeli, non certo le variazioni di Brahms. Evidentemente uno dei due aveva una capacità di memoria maggiore. Cioè non è da un concorso che puoi stabilire che uno è sempre meglio di un altro in tutto e per tutto. Se dici che SECONDO TE le suona meglio Tizio o Caio, allora va bene. Ma non puoi dare un giudizio assoluto, anche se c'è un concorso in atto. E se segui i concorsi, vedi che non sempre chi arriva primo ha poi più fama.
Poi, se prendi due artisti su un brano, ed uno fa solo errori e l'altro lo suona bene è un altro conto. È questo il caso? Mi pare di no.
Non so se ho chiarito il mio pensiero, saluti
There is also a version for Piano and Orchestra of these variations here: ua-cam.com/video/76R4hPCBk4w/v-deo.html
Техника, конечно , блестящая, но, мне кажется безжизненная, порой торопливая. Нет одной вариации
Is it just me, or is this a very strange interpretation of this piece? I think the tempo is sometimes rushed. And it is as if he does not really understand Brahms, or else everyone else that I've heard has misinterpreted him. It doesn't sound too much like Brahms to me. But it is very precise - not sloppy. (I don't think others misconceived Brahms. A queer interpretation. Well, I'm not going to learn this piece just to see if he has it wrong. I am not very musical and this piece is far too difficult. It is one of my favorite works, but insanely difficult to play.)
Stewart Nash There's no doubting the idiosyncracy and he also juggles the order of variations which is totally unorthodox and can't say I agree with that. As I've recently performed Bk 1 I think it's a pity he mangles the rhythm of var 8 and I personally would prefer var 11 slightly slower. I agree with his tempo for var. 12 which everyone now seems to want to play it terribly slowly. But you know the difference is when you listen to a lot of the performances on here by younger players, they make Brahms paganini sound like a 5 finger exercise by Czerny - almost note perfect(boringly so) and dull as ditch water - Michelangeli's performance never sounds like that!
Stewart Nash sounds as if ABM w perfect pitch tuned each string before performing.
He literally skipped one of the best variations, number 14 of book 1. If you're going to play the damn work, play it right for heaven's sake. Great technique, stupid arrangement.
He did play it, he just moved it to the end. If you are going to comment listen to the damn recording first.
@@asalj4014 Ok fair enough, but I listened and he still plays only part of book 1 no. 14. Frustrating, but I have nothing negative to say about his playing.
@@alhfgsp He played it in the 1952 recording. Check it out if you haven't.
@@user-jx9si5lv5m Thanks, I'll check it out.
@@user-jx9si5lv5m was the 1952 recording live? if not, then that would explain why he didnt play it here (live)...did not want to chance making mistake(s) ? I cant blame him for that !
Brahms himself once mentioned : "Ich hab nichts zum sagen" ( I have nothing to say ). He was a latecomer and never came even close the level of a Beethoven. Too many notes,
too much noise. No message. Brilliant performance though.
Your musical judgement is certainly up there with the bloke in Amadeus who complained that Mozarts music contained too many notes.
Brahms did come close to Beethoven. He was, along with Ludwig, one of few true masters of orchestral rhythm.
Brahms could be self deprecating, but his message was very clear.
Brahms since his youth was an old embittered man.-Period.
No message, just technical know-how. Same level as Haydn, Clementi,
Salieri, Liszt, Meyerbeer, Alkan etc.- Richard Wagner hated him for that.
+Michael Fischer Wagner could only hope to achieve Haydns greatness. Alkan was the second or third greatest pianist of his time but a minor composer.
Wagner was a great champion of Liszt who was a fine composer along with Wagner. Neither could equal the three B's which include Brahms.
Brahms was perfectionist about his major works so he wrote less than Beethoven did in a long life ; yet Mozart wrote far more in a much shorter life than either.
Classical composers don't really have a Message like John Lennon or Bob Dylan.
Wagner thought Germanic music was cool and should look back to ancient legend while moving outside classical forms.
Brahms had his own great vision of classical romanticism which is why Schumann championed him.
Some guy who knew Brahms well said : "Das war ein boeser Mann..."
( That was an evil man...) You cannot be great being evil and embittered.
Schubert could not come close to Beethoven, but topped him with his "Lieder".- Brahms topped nobody with nothing. Look what Hugo Wolf or Bruckner said about him.
+Michael Fischer The whole three B's was an evil conspiracy. I don't know how I could have ever disagreed with you. Cheers.
boring, musicalement....................................................
The composition is so boring, even ABM could not save it.
@@prinzparsiphal777 I LOVE this work... not boring to me...
Fai dell’altro
@@prinzparsiphal777 Sorry, what do you mean, "boring"? What isn't boring then?