Wow. This is so freaking good, I don't even know where to start. It is so together, all the details are present, and it has the tempo flexibility of a single pianist. The shimmer and sparkle of the second movement is phenomenal. This is the best performance of this piece I've ever heard, and the best on UA-cam. Thanks so much for sharing.
Honestly? Who hears that the second movement is actually a waltz? If noone then sorry, but it is not a good performance... Fast indeed, but not deep at all. Rachmaninoff named it waltz and gave metronomic tempo (84), but it seems like all pianists ignore the composer. This guys, with all due respect play in tempo 116. Great pianists, but didn't think too much about their interpretation i guess...
Having played this myself, once, a long time ago, I agree that this is a stunning performance, which - despite superhuman speed in the Valse, keeps every detail audible. And such delicacy and poise in the phrasing, almost Mozartean in its grace. No showmanship beyond what the music effortlessly carries. I am gutted that Lugansky came to London in 2014 and I missed him. These two are now on my radar!
I have always identified with this piece, in that it is much like one's life, innocence, love, serenity juxtaposed with pain, turmoil and anguish, yet emerges with victory!
Rhythmische und lebhafte live Aufführung dieses erfreulichen Meisterwerks mit perfekt synchronisierten Töne zweier Klaviere im inspirierenden Tempo. Die intime und technisch perfekte Mitwirkung zwischen den beiden Pianisten ist echt unvergleichlich.
В этом исполнении гениально сочетаются и прочувствованность, и интеллигентность, и понимание сути Рахманиновской музыки того периода. Хорошо известное исполнение Ашкенази - Превин просто меркнет. И очень жаль, что конкурс Чайковского в свое время обошелся с этими ребятами абсолютно недостойно. А Н.Л. Луганский - величина!
This is one of the best interpretations of this great piece that I've heard. I have a really crummy recording of it that is played way too slow by pianists that appear not to have the ability to play this demanding work. Rudenko and Lugansky are great! Thanks for sharing.
But the thing is that Rachmaninoff gave the metronomic tempos in this piece and Lugansky/Rudenko just ignore them. In this superfast tempos it makes very little sense (especially crazy running waltz as the second movement). Deeper pianists look for more sense than just fast tempo...
I've actually studied this piece and I Prefer it on the slow side, simply because if played too fast, you miss so much of the musicality within each phrase. I like this performance the best so far. Therefore, just because pianists play it slow does Not mean they do not possess the technique to increase the tempo. It simply means that they are sensitive to all the beautiful melodies within and if played too fast, it ends up more like a Czerny exercise than the beautiful haunting melancholy work that this is!
I don't get how you prefer this piece on the slow side, but like this piece the best so far. This is the fastest performance I've heard so far. The Valse for example, the piano was probably on fire at the recording.
Timpaaa2 maybe he referred to Martha Argerich's rendition. Her version really has very fast tempo. Agree, this is the best version for me, particularly the Valse which I like the most.
I agree with Perties. Like the 2nd Symphony. So much of the subtlety is lost when it is rushed. I like it when the music almost comes to a halt on the crest of wave and then swoops down again so that you leave your stomach behind and the hairs stand up on the back of your neck. And, the wonderful Martha does play it a bit too fast because she is a showman . . . or, rather, show-woman. Mind you, I can't even whistle in tune. I just listen.
If you hear carefully, Argerich with her friends play faster just the first part. The difference is other: some prefer big line - phrase and legato from starting to ending like watching the beauty of a forest as a whole, which is the case of Argerich- friends. Other prefer smaller noticeable phrases like watching each tree in a forest which is more the case here, still in very legato demanded by Rachmaninoff' s style. Both ways are very valid in music .
+uranus terra I guess that if you listen to different versions every time (or play it differently yourself) you can enjoy both worlds, if you are only willing to walk the same forest time after time again and try to look and discover new things...
I'm familiar with the Freire/Argerich rendition of this - very close in tempo and expression. It is yet one more of Rachmaninov's unique melding of romance, melancholy and dynamism.
I heard these two play this at La Roque and the waltz as encore in Nantes in 2012. Altho there are minor slips here, i like this performance even better, many details coming thru well without the hard speediness they can have sometimes. I don't much like Rudenko on his own but he's a good team-mate!
Многих прослушал -- лучше ансамбля и лучшего Рахманинова не услышал. Понятно, это дело субъективное, и всё же... После них ближе всего по качеству -- Брук и Тайманов. Потом долго никого нет.
Wow. This is so freaking good, I don't even know where to start. It is so together, all the details are present, and it has the tempo flexibility of a single pianist. The shimmer and sparkle of the second movement is phenomenal. This is the best performance of this piece I've ever heard, and the best on UA-cam. Thanks so much for sharing.
Indeed!!!
Indeed!!!
I'm in love with their performance of the vals. Mesmerazing.
Daniel Stipe ,merle
Honestly? Who hears that the second movement is actually a waltz? If noone then sorry, but it is not a good performance... Fast indeed, but not deep at all. Rachmaninoff named it waltz and gave metronomic tempo (84), but it seems like all pianists ignore the composer. This guys, with all due respect play in tempo 116. Great pianists, but didn't think too much about their interpretation i guess...
The rubatos in the last movement still blow me away every time I listen to this and I've known this recording for more than 10 years now!...
Having played this myself, once, a long time ago, I agree that this is a stunning performance, which - despite superhuman speed in the Valse, keeps every detail audible. And such delicacy and poise in the phrasing, almost Mozartean in its grace. No showmanship beyond what the music effortlessly carries. I am gutted that Lugansky came to London in 2014 and I missed him. These two are now on my radar!
Rudenko is an extraordinary but an underrated pianist.
I have always identified with this piece, in that it is much like one's life, innocence, love, serenity juxtaposed with pain, turmoil and anguish, yet emerges with victory!
PERTIES1891 Well said! I agree!
I agree that Rudenko is a really good pianist ... I'm looking forward to hearing more of him.
This is simply perfect. We can listen everything. The ending is so energic, such a masterful time counting and crescendo!
Rhythmische und lebhafte live Aufführung dieses erfreulichen Meisterwerks mit perfekt synchronisierten Töne zweier Klaviere im inspirierenden Tempo. Die intime und technisch perfekte Mitwirkung zwischen den beiden Pianisten ist echt unvergleichlich.
В этом исполнении гениально сочетаются и прочувствованность, и интеллигентность, и понимание сути Рахманиновской музыки того периода. Хорошо известное исполнение Ашкенази - Превин просто меркнет. И очень жаль, что конкурс Чайковского в свое время обошелся с этими ребятами абсолютно недостойно. А Н.Л. Луганский - величина!
Yes. And Rudenko is the black-haired one. Rudenko is much too underrated, he's really a wonderful pianist.
This is one of the best interpretations of this great piece that I've heard. I have a really crummy recording of it that is played way too slow by pianists that appear not to have the ability to play this demanding work. Rudenko and Lugansky are great! Thanks for sharing.
But the thing is that Rachmaninoff gave the metronomic tempos in this piece and Lugansky/Rudenko just ignore them. In this superfast tempos it makes very little sense (especially crazy running waltz as the second movement). Deeper pianists look for more sense than just fast tempo...
The part from 14:02-14:10 is AMAZING!
Looks like there's only one pianist playing. So together in every sense
Szergej Rachmaninov:Szvit két zongorára Op.17
1.Bevezetés 00:00
2.G-dúr keringő 04:03
3. Asz-dúr románc 09:30
4. Tarantelle 16:51
Vadim Rudenko és Nyikolaj Luganszkij-zongora
Fantastic!
I've actually studied this piece and I Prefer it on the slow side, simply because if played too fast, you miss so much of the musicality within each phrase. I like this performance the best so far. Therefore, just because pianists play it slow does Not mean they do not possess the technique to increase the tempo. It simply means that they are sensitive to all the beautiful melodies within and if played too fast, it ends up more like a Czerny exercise than the beautiful haunting melancholy work that this is!
I don't get how you prefer this piece on the slow side, but like this piece the best so far. This is the fastest performance I've heard so far. The Valse for example, the piano was probably on fire at the recording.
Timpaaa2
maybe he referred to Martha Argerich's rendition. Her version really has very fast tempo. Agree, this is the best version for me, particularly the Valse which I like the most.
I agree with Perties. Like the 2nd Symphony. So much of the subtlety is lost when it is rushed. I like it when the music almost comes to a halt on the crest of wave and then swoops down again so that you leave your stomach behind and the hairs stand up on the back of your neck. And, the wonderful Martha does play it a bit too fast because she is a showman . . . or, rather, show-woman. Mind you, I can't even whistle in tune. I just listen.
If you hear carefully, Argerich with her friends play faster just the first part. The difference is other: some prefer big line - phrase and legato from starting to ending like watching the beauty of a forest as a whole, which is the case of Argerich- friends. Other prefer smaller noticeable phrases like watching each tree in a forest which is more the case here, still in very legato demanded by Rachmaninoff' s style. Both ways are very valid in music .
+uranus terra I guess that if you listen to different versions every time (or play it differently yourself) you can enjoy both worlds, if you are only willing to walk the same forest time after time again and try to look and discover new things...
Love it!
I'm familiar with the Freire/Argerich rendition of this - very close in tempo and expression. It is yet one more of Rachmaninov's unique melding of romance, melancholy and dynamism.
Thanks for uploading!
I heard these two play this at La Roque and the waltz as encore in Nantes in 2012. Altho there are minor slips here, i like this performance even better, many details coming thru well without the hard speediness they can have sometimes. I don't much like Rudenko on his own but he's a good team-mate!
amazing!
20:20-20:35 anyone hearing Tchaikovsky piano concerto 1?
Многих прослушал -- лучше ансамбля и лучшего Рахманинова не услышал. Понятно, это дело субъективное, и всё же...
После них ближе всего по качеству -- Брук и Тайманов. Потом долго никого нет.
Which one is playing piano 2?
Lugansky
16:51
ふ
凡庸
Be fair