Claudio Arrau interviewed in 1964
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- French Language - English Subtitles
This is part of a presentation of two classical works telecasted on Canadian Television on March 5, 1964
Brief but nonetheless interesting insight about the maestro!
Program:
Mozart - Sonata in A minor, K 310
Beethoven - Piano Sonata No. 32 in C minor, Op. 111
Claudio Arrau (1903 - 1991)
he spoke very well french, spanish, german, english and playing the whole compositions of bach, mozart, beethoven, haydn, schumann, schubert, debussy and many more and here I'm only playing pc games.
Un others words..a Genius.!
My favourite pianist ever, and definitely one of the all-time greatest pianists in history.
a VERY good No 1
Come on! Emil Gilels( the King pianist!) Artur Rubinstein( the GOD!) Wilhelm Kempff( the most beautiful piano sound!) Radu Lupu( the most colorful piano sound!) Grigory Sokolov( The Giant of Piano! The Titan of Piano!) Sviatoslav Richter( The Genius!)
Not only an amazing pianist, but also I've now heard him speak fluently and engagingly in English, Spanish, French.. any other languages? An incredible man.
He was able to speak German as well, since he was taught by Martin Krause and lived there until 1941.
Deutsch
He was a student of Krause who was a student of Liszt who was a student of Czerny who was a student of Beethoven....mind blown.
and he is the teacher of Stephen Drury who is my teacher at new england conservatory now
@@aktaslunathats impressive!!
Enfin une vidéo en langue française. Arrau non seulement un génie de l'interprétation musicale, mais aussi un esprit fin qui parle notre langue mieux que nos propres compatriotes. Que de talents...
una de las mas grandes personalidades chilenas de la historia,reconocido internacionalmente mucho mas que en su propio pais...
@Ray0X0 It doesn't have to do with understanding his character, but with a certain view or philosophy. Of course I know that there were no modern piano's in Bach's time; but if you follow that line of thought, then playing Mozart on a modern Steinway is wrong too, as the sound of an 18th century fortepiano is also totally different! Despite another instrument, one can still be faithful.
Btw, later in life, in the 80s, Arrau changed his view again. In 1991 he even recorded 4 Partitas of Bach.
Mis infinitos respetos y admiración al maestro señor Claudio Arrau Leon su prodigiosa interpretación 🎭 fuè inigualable sin duda el mejor pianista del siglo XX . Un chileno de estirpe su sencillez y humildad digno de un genio 🙏🙏🙏👏👏👏❤️❤️❤️🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱
I am glad to hear that Arrau believed oe needs to know the complete works to fully understand the composer because at this point I have already embarked on a quest to listen to the complete works of as many of the great composers as I can!
Wow - this is a fascinating document! Thank you so much for posting.
Arrau's French is impeccable! :-o
I think at 4:17 there is a big mistake in the English translation: Arrau didn't mean to say that Debussy, was THE greatest composer for piano, I think he said that Debussy was ONE OF THE greatest composers for piano.
Translation is perfect: 'le plus grand compositeur pour le piano'
the meeting of two great mustaches
Fantastic !!! Thanks for sharing !
Dios... cuantos idiomas habla???
FORMIDABLE!
@pianopera... ... my personal opinion is that Bach wrote absolute music ... instruments were made for the composition ... not vice versa ... just a thought! ... performing/listening to Bach on period/reconstructed instruments of the time is fascinating, though. ... I think there is room for differences of opinion !!!
His french is perfect.
@gerardbedecarter I agree with you! I think Bach can sound equally well on a piano or on a period instrument -- it all depends who is playing.
ARRAU ETERNAL
A fascinating interview!!!
@pianopera ... May be, because you don't understand Arrau's character... Think about this, Bach had no piano at his disposal, like today, but the instrument of his own time, the harpsichord.
What Arrau is trying to say is to play Bach's work at piano does not represent what Bach looked, the piano does not faithfully represent what Bach had in mind when composing. Arrau was 100% faithful to the work and what the composer wanted, and didn't play a work if he was not convinced of that.
@pianopera In fact he pauses and the "un" gets lost slightly! So the sub-tittler,not understanding fully the context,translates what he thunk he heard. Arrau's speech & expression is as harmonious in French as the greatest of his playing!
@suzettegm Yes it is!
How many languages did he speak? For sure spanish, english and german, now french, any other?
There’s an interview posted on UA-cam where he speaks Italian fluently and perfectly
Italian too.
@honron21 Five, really... are you sit?, ok ... LATIN too !!! That was Claudio Arrau, one person never adhered to know only the surface of something, but the root primeval essence, the origin of things, always seeking the true sense, including his own language.
A great man but his opinion on Bach in this interview is wrong or the translation is incorrect. Bachs music is not medieval but universal and absolute. That's why the piano works can be played both on a harpsichord and on a modern piano and even on other instruments.
I am glad that this subtit(t)ler's blunder is now confirmed by two gentlemen with very good ears!
I must add that I very respectfully disagree with Arrau's view on Bach -- I think it CAN be played on a modern piano, I have always felt that in the hands of a master the result can be very satisfying even if Bach's keyboard output was originally written for other instruments. One has to find a personal, balanced way to "make it work" on a Steinway... the same applies for Scarlatti, Couperin etc.
I admire Arrau immensely, but I disagree with him on the choice of instrument for Bach. I much prefer Bach (and also Scarlatti) on a modern piano instead of the harpsichord. There is so much more potential on a modern grand-dynamics and tone colours are only the beginning. Though I will say the French clavecinistes can be exquisite on a harpsichord (wasn't it Landowska who called Couperin "the Chopin of the harpsichord"?
What you say about the potential of the piano is true... but the instrument was barely in use at the time of Bach (1685-1750) and he did not write his music for it - so it cannot possibly be authentic to how Bach intended it.
From Wikipedia "Silbermann showed Johann Sebastian Bach one of his early instruments in the 1730s, but Bach did not like it at that time, claiming that the higher notes were too soft to allow a full dynamic range. Although this earned him some animosity from Silbermann, the criticism was apparently heeded. Bach did approve of a later instrument he saw in 1747, and even served as an agent in selling Silbermann's pianos."
VenusElectricRecords What the Wiki article you are quoting here is referring to the primitive fortepianos of nearly three centuries ago. I don't think I would have liked them either. But I think Bach would have been thrilled with the modern concert grand, and who knows what magisterial works he might have composed for that? All you have to do is listen to the magnificent recordings on the modern piano by artistic greats such as Edwin Fischer, Rosalyn Tureck, Glenn Gould, Angela Hewitt, Murray Perahia, and others. If you know anything about Bach, you know he was a great arranger of other composers' music, as well as of his own, for other instruments or media. Bach's music is ABSOLUTE MUSIC. It transcends the limitations of a specific instrument to communicate its greatness.
James Vaughan Arrau changed his mind when he heard his own Bach recordings for RCA and at the very end of his career he recorded 4 Bach Partitas for Philips in 1991 , three months before his death.
They were recorded on the modern grand piano.
Arrau was a purist
"Ba.....k"????? shame
It's the correct pronunciation in German, and Bach is a German, nothing is shame here I think. 😁