In Reply to: RE: + Kapell and Moravec, - Argerich and Zimerman? posted by Tadlo on August 18, 2010 at 21:03:58:
tadlo,
"The survey was conducted by the Music magazine of the BBC. The first B in BBC is not an A.
Sorry, I don't understand this comment- or is this information?
Argerich is one of the most passionate players around. What did you hear her play that was held back and overly polite?
Argerich is an excellent player and worthy of any great pianists' list, but I don't have the sensation of an inner driving passion, but a somewhat studied, constructed one. This is a problem I have with Yo-Yo Ma, often it's an imitation of passion- a great imitation, but still an imitation. Argerich too is sometimes not as transparent a player- there is a distracting sensation of technical effort, but again this is minor. As well, occasionally, I don't agree with her approach to Bach- there's some rhythmic uncertainties and lack of contrasts that drains some of the contrapuntal drive. I'm probably too engaged by Gould and Richter's Bach- spoiled for Gould's inner voice leading and Richter's architecture- that confident high energy.
However, just as with Zimerman, we're discussing the "best of the best"- the very highest critical standard. These and many others are all pianists to listen to.
As mentioned in my earlier post, any "Best XX Whatevers in the Universe" list is bound to cause hurt feelings. I once saw a serious 100 greatest movies list with "Casablanca" as No.1.
It's probably more useful instead of deleting from these lists to just extend the list.
Cheers,
Bambi B
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: + Kapell and Moravec, - Argerich and Zimerman? - Bambi B 08/19/1000:57:25 08/19/10 (1)
- RE: + Kapell and Moravec, - Argerich and Zimerman? - Tadlo 10:10:09 08/19/10 (0)