Van Cliburn was born for this, so placed in the history of the world to act as beloved good will ambassador to the Soviet peoples from the United States when a beloved ambassador was most needed. Surely he has earned our deepest gratitude and love. This performance is magnificent! Subscribed!
Van Cliburn really lets loose in this performance, and I can't help but feel a little too much of a nervous drive from him. I really do love his recording from 1960.
@@ADGO Hehe, if you say so. I admire the work tremendously, but at the same time I'm really tired of it. I've been thinking about ranting a little about that tonight, but I probably shouldn't since all I'm likely to accomplish is to irritate people.
Yeah I probably wouldn't. That has more to do with you and me and our aged cauliflower ears than anything to do with the work itself. I almost never listen to it. However when I do I still find the inherent struggle within it to take me back to my early 20s when I found the work to be really inspiring - in part from that embattled sense, in part from its cyclical emerge/dissolve nature. It's one of those lasting works that I feel you can avoid for a decade +, as I have, yet return to randomly some time and still be swept away.
@@ADGO Those are great points about the work. That I've shied away from it is just since I think it sounds so overplanned and overthought nowadays. I still return to Richter/Carnegie every now and then for the sheer physical impact, but in any other "standard" performance I become restless after a few bars. It's like returning to that movie which seeks to build a big climax, but which you've seen 200 times already. The ones which still keep my attention are the more searching, Plan B narratives. Rana, Leschenko, etc - performances which almost deliberately try to do something different with it.
There is something amiss when Van Cliburn starts sounding like Horowitz. I like his Rach 3 and the Tchaikovsky very, very much. The rest I am not so sure about.
Van Cliburn's mother studied with Liszt's secretary, Arthur Friedheim. So Cliburn is a direct pianistic descendant of Liszt. It would be strange if he didn't play Liszt without at least some of the abandon that the fire-eating virtuosi of his time did - because Liszt and his circle certainly would've done something similar! (Think of the eyewitness accounts we have of what Busoni or Eugen d'Albert sounded like.) Cliburn reaches that Everest in this moment.
@@farazhaiderpiano I don't think Arthur Friedheim should be called a secretary, he was a full fledged pupil of Liszt. Secretary gives a connotation of just copying and writing correspondence.
Van Cliburn was born for this, so placed in the history of the world to act as beloved good will ambassador to the Soviet peoples from the United States when a beloved ambassador was most needed. Surely he has earned our deepest gratitude and love. This performance is magnificent! Subscribed!
The spontaneity, and projection of an at times almost-out-of-control passion, are thrilling here. Many thanks.
Van Cliburn really lets loose in this performance, and I can't help but feel a little too much of a nervous drive from him. I really do love his recording from 1960.
I like his nervous drive
@@klausknulp Ditto!
Some places very dynamic, but all composition very beautiful.
Блестящий пианист!
Such a fire!
Very good!
Hah, prophetic. I also have a Liszt sonata coming up later today.
surely the most fitting work for VE day
@@ADGO Hehe, if you say so. I admire the work tremendously, but at the same time I'm really tired of it. I've been thinking about ranting a little about that tonight, but I probably shouldn't since all I'm likely to accomplish is to irritate people.
Yeah I probably wouldn't. That has more to do with you and me and our aged cauliflower ears than anything to do with the work itself. I almost never listen to it. However when I do I still find the inherent struggle within it to take me back to my early 20s when I found the work to be really inspiring - in part from that embattled sense, in part from its cyclical emerge/dissolve nature. It's one of those lasting works that I feel you can avoid for a decade +, as I have, yet return to randomly some time and still be swept away.
@@ADGO Those are great points about the work. That I've shied away from it is just since I think it sounds so overplanned and overthought nowadays. I still return to Richter/Carnegie every now and then for the sheer physical impact, but in any other "standard" performance I become restless after a few bars. It's like returning to that movie which seeks to build a big climax, but which you've seen 200 times already. The ones which still keep my attention are the more searching, Plan B narratives. Rana, Leschenko, etc - performances which almost deliberately try to do something different with it.
@@christian-johansson Given the very form of the sonata it's natural to get tired of it...
😻
There is something amiss when Van Cliburn starts sounding like Horowitz. I like his Rach 3 and the Tchaikovsky very, very much. The rest I am not so sure about.
Van Cliburn's mother studied with Liszt's secretary, Arthur Friedheim. So Cliburn is a direct pianistic descendant of Liszt. It would be strange if he didn't play Liszt without at least some of the abandon that the fire-eating virtuosi of his time did - because Liszt and his circle certainly would've done something similar! (Think of the eyewitness accounts we have of what Busoni or Eugen d'Albert sounded like.)
Cliburn reaches that Everest in this moment.
@@farazhaiderpiano I don't think Arthur Friedheim should be called a secretary, he was a full fledged pupil of Liszt. Secretary gives a connotation of just copying and writing correspondence.