For a number of years, I knew quite well a pianist who had studied with Godowsky and to whom he dedicated a number of his transcriptions. (She was 85 when I was 15) She said he hated recording, only went to the studio when he needed money (often to placate his daughter Dagmar) and left without hearing the results. This might explain the rather straightforward, charmless approach? She said the time to hear him was after dinner when he would go to the piano and in a totally relaxed manner play his etudes for half an hour. I'd like to have been there....
Cortot also hated recording, despite his recordings being amazing. Magda Tagliaferro said he got nervous and recorded much faster than he usually played. Godowsky had the fame of being a terrible pianist. People would say he wrote music with tons of notes because he couldn't play beautiful. That was his only way to show off.
Это поледняя вещь, записанная Годовским в его жизни и карьере. По свидетельству его домашних он тогда страшно нервничал, ему не нравилось, он вернулся домой совершенно разбитым. Ночью его настиг инсульт, от которого он уже оправится не смог.
Yes, the speed is extreme, but I get so tired of the modern pianists who play it with constant, unwarranted tempo changes, like driving on the freeway with brake on, brake off, brake on, brake off. So annoying. At least G picks a tempo and sticks with it, except for a few nice rubati. Also, most pianists take the "piu lento" section at a dreary, monotonous pace (snore). G takes that middle part too fast, but at least he doesn't bore you to death with it.
This was supposed to be along with his phenomenal Schubert and Grieg Ballade one of he better recorded legacies left us. It is recording so badly! and the beginning is horrendous with unbalances... Anyway all this stuff about the golden age is baloney . any welltrained pianist will tell you Sauer,Rosenthal,Lhevinne,Moisewitsch ofcourse everything we have of Hofmann's is unbelievable but more often the Leshetitzky and Liszt students are messy technically not impressive and musically sound like pigs. Schnabel impresses musically often but not in the Brahms concerti. anyway the recorded sound is so awful you have to imagine .Godowsky's chopin 2nd sonata is no glory .Rach's is worth remembering but everyday I hear personality and imagination. Irmellini in FuneralMarch sonata is better than any recording I've ever heard ! Hear Busoni in the roll of the complete Chopin preludes .It's remarkable music and he really is making up his own music but is that what We want? the best music is being made now .Our teachers are better,the students can take a piano apart and put it back together and they have more knowledge about the body ,weight,release and the hand and breathing so don't believe all this old white people's baloney about the Golden Era . every Warsaw Chopin competition has better thinking , musicality than you'll ever hear on a recording made before 1960.
You make some excellent points here. The "golden age" fallacy is a perniciously easy trap to fall into. I'd also add, however, that what we appreciate nowadays may differ from what people before the 1920s appreciated. The advent of widespread access to easily reproduceable recordings may have changed what listeners in some cultures expected from performers: that is to say, the balance of appreciation for technical brilliance versus emotional depth may have been different between, say, England versus Russia in 1900, but also between England of 1900 versus 1940. Audiences are far more forgiving than audio recordings: the latter preserves what's played, both intentionally and not.
For a number of years, I knew quite well a pianist who had studied with Godowsky and to whom he dedicated a number of his transcriptions. (She was 85 when I was 15) She said he hated recording, only went to the studio when he needed money (often to placate his daughter Dagmar) and left without hearing the results.
This might explain the rather straightforward, charmless approach? She said the time to hear him was after dinner when he would go to the piano and in a totally relaxed manner play his etudes for half an hour. I'd like to have been there....
Cortot also hated recording, despite his recordings being amazing. Magda Tagliaferro said he got nervous and recorded much faster than he usually played.
Godowsky had the fame of being a terrible pianist. People would say he wrote music with tons of notes because he couldn't play beautiful. That was his only way to show off.
Godowsky played this piece the best without a doubt. He played 1st as well but he was perfect in 4th. Very elegant!
Rafal
I agree. His second scherzo is also really great!
Love this piece! Godowsky's tone is wonderful!
You're listening to somebody who played for Brahms - think of it.
WOW!
It’s one of his greatest records and one of his last.
Это поледняя вещь, записанная Годовским в его жизни и карьере. По свидетельству его домашних он тогда страшно нервничал, ему не нравилось, он вернулся домой совершенно разбитым. Ночью его настиг инсульт, от которого он уже оправится не смог.
Rachmaninoff practiced 14, hours per day to try to equal Godowsky's level of playing before he started his adult concert career
Terrible
Wrong
Grow up
The recording Is terrible Much distorted the recording Is wonderful
Brilliant, virtuosic playing of the old school. MUCH too fast.
Yes, the speed is extreme, but I get so tired of the modern pianists who play it with constant, unwarranted tempo changes, like driving on the freeway with brake on, brake off, brake on, brake off. So annoying. At least G picks a tempo and sticks with it, except for a few nice rubati. Also, most pianists take the "piu lento" section at a dreary, monotonous pace (snore). G takes that middle part too fast, but at least he doesn't bore you to death with it.
@@bettyrouch1833 I don't hear that as much but I would imagine it quite irritating
I knew a virtuoso pianist who was much too slow to appreciate fast playing collegues. they were much too fast for her.
@@elijaguy powerful evidence..... of WHAT????
I am so happy we never get to hear Liszt and Chopin, because you and those alike would have a heart attack…
This was supposed to be along with his phenomenal Schubert and Grieg Ballade one of he better recorded legacies left us. It is recording so badly! and the beginning is horrendous with unbalances... Anyway all this stuff about the golden age is baloney . any welltrained pianist will tell you Sauer,Rosenthal,Lhevinne,Moisewitsch ofcourse everything we have of Hofmann's is unbelievable but more often the Leshetitzky and Liszt students are messy technically not impressive and musically sound like pigs. Schnabel impresses musically often but not in the Brahms concerti. anyway the recorded sound is so awful you have to imagine .Godowsky's chopin 2nd sonata is no glory .Rach's is worth remembering but everyday I hear personality and imagination. Irmellini in FuneralMarch sonata is better than any recording I've ever heard ! Hear Busoni in the roll of the complete Chopin preludes .It's remarkable music and he really is making up his own music but is that what We want? the best music is being made now .Our teachers are better,the students can take a piano apart and put it back together and they have more knowledge about the body ,weight,release and the hand and breathing so don't believe all this old white people's baloney about the Golden Era . every Warsaw Chopin competition has better thinking , musicality than you'll ever hear on a recording made before 1960.
You make some excellent points here. The "golden age" fallacy is a perniciously easy trap to fall into.
I'd also add, however, that what we appreciate nowadays may differ from what people before the 1920s appreciated. The advent of widespread access to easily reproduceable recordings may have changed what listeners in some cultures expected from performers: that is to say, the balance of appreciation for technical brilliance versus emotional depth may have been different between, say, England versus Russia in 1900, but also between England of 1900 versus 1940. Audiences are far more forgiving than audio recordings: the latter preserves what's played, both intentionally and not.