He makes a priority of creating an authentic interpretation of every work that he performs. There is actually no such thing as older music. Only in your mind is there such a distinction. Music is ageless, as love is. Actually, he is so marvelous a performer that he does not "interpret" works, he simply serves as the vehicle by which they are transmitted from the composers intentions to the listening audience. Every single gesture of this great player is utter mastery in old music as in new
Well, in my youth I was a great admirer of Starker. But when you start to talk about his Boccherini Concerto in B-flat, you ought to bear in mind that the work that went by that name in Starker's day was actually composed in the 19th century by Friedrich Gruetzmacher, who took as his point of departure various ideas in Boccherini's concerti in G major and in B-flat major. Boccherini's original version of the B-flat Concerto, quite different from (and much better than) Gruetzmacher's pot-pourri, was first revealed to a wide audience via a recording with Maurice Gendron as the wonderful soloist, with a Romantic-sounding orchestra conducted by Pablo Casals.
those no nothings who blab about authentic interpretations of older music are empty headed pretentious thinking they know something no nothings. There is no such thing as authentic interpretations of older music, there is simply well informed performance of masterpieces by masters of music like Starker. His performance is not old or new, it is simply excellent, marvelous and masterful enactments of the great music of Boccherini.
HIs technique is wonderful but stylistically, it's no different from how he would play the Dvorak b minor. It just simply doesn't have the right style to fit Boccherini.
Boccherini was a classical composer... He lived during the time of Haydn, and has similar compositional qualities. So recordings by "Baroque" cellists would not be authentic either. What do you consider inauthentic about this interpretation?
some people say that there are only opinions and no facts in judging musical excellence of performance and composition. But if there are only opinions and no facts, than that itself is an opinion and therefore meaningless. There are facts about how well people play and write music but only those people who know music well enough to know the difference between musical facts and musical opinions know that Starker is a great player of music old and new and the purists of old music are not included
He's great....but the only problem I have with him, and other great cellists like him (especially ones that come from Slavic countries) are too rough with some of the baroque and classical music. They just don't know how to treat. He's just too heavy and sustains too much for the earlier classical style this was written for.
It's true that Starker's generation of string players tended to perform 18th-century works in a rather heavy legato style. But "rough"? Starker? Never! I heard him live fifteen or so times in my youth, and his playing was always clean and silken. He could be mannered, but his tone was always pure (if, at times, somewhat brushy). I played for him twice -- the Lalo Concerto and Schumann's "Fantasy Pieces" -- and he was a far less terrifying teacher than I had expected.
You misunderstand me. I do not think, nor did I ever say in the you tube reviews, that one has to log x amount of years listening to and studying music, in order to appreciate music. But in order to understand it as intimately as I do, one would have to do more than just listen to it and enjoy it. One would have to study the mechanics of and history of and practices of any field including Western European indigenous (Classical) Art Music in order to "go beyond" the mere love of it.
the pretentious fool who mentioned Bylsma in the same breath as Starker needs atleast several years of severely serious musical instruction before he opens his mouth again about things musical and makes an utter fool of himself as he did.
Lively and joyful performance from one the greatest cellists of all time!
and his wonderful bow control makes it so light and beautiful !
Thank you Maestro Starker for your superb musicianship and extraordinary cello pleying.
Only genius notices Starker is a genius. High quality stuff. His music is attached to one's mind without excessive or even fake emotional attachment
uh nope anybody can notice starker is a genius
So extraordinary... Respect and admiration !
The perfect cellist!
Glad to hear Maestro Starker! Thank you
He makes a priority of creating an authentic interpretation of every work that he performs. There is actually no such thing as older music. Only in your mind is there such a distinction. Music is ageless, as love is. Actually, he is so marvelous a performer that he does not "interpret" works, he simply serves as the vehicle by which they are transmitted from the composers intentions to the listening audience. Every single gesture of this great player is utter mastery in old music as in new
movement 1: 0:27
movement 2: 4:00
Love him so much ! 😙 He is amazing! ❤
Its so perfect for me
He's marvelous...
His boccherini cello concerto in Bb is monumental as well.Excellent cadenza he wrote himself :)
Well, in my youth I was a great admirer of Starker. But when you start to talk about his Boccherini Concerto in B-flat, you ought to bear in mind that the work that went by that name in Starker's day was actually composed in the 19th century by Friedrich Gruetzmacher, who took as his point of departure various ideas in Boccherini's concerti in G major and in B-flat major. Boccherini's original version of the B-flat Concerto, quite different from (and much better than) Gruetzmacher's pot-pourri, was first revealed to a wide audience via a recording with Maurice Gendron as the wonderful soloist, with a Romantic-sounding orchestra conducted by Pablo Casals.
@@fourstrings48 r/iamverysmart
those no nothings who blab about authentic interpretations of older music are empty headed pretentious thinking they know something no nothings. There is no such thing as authentic interpretations of older music, there is simply well informed performance of masterpieces by masters of music like Starker. His performance is not old or new, it is simply excellent, marvelous and masterful enactments of the great music of Boccherini.
Master
very nice...
Black Adder! Black Adder! 8:05
ikr i thought that too
4:00 2악장
What stupid could give dislike to this? Who says he doesn't play good should shut up because he has no idea about what music is.👊
Valentin Dimitrie 👍
00:27
brate, nema preko njega!
👍
Perfect and very musical, but I wish he made a bit more dynamic contrast in the Adagio
HIs technique is wonderful but stylistically, it's no different from how he would play the Dvorak b minor. It just simply doesn't have the right style to fit Boccherini.
let alone that he does not play not on gut strings, using a non 18th century bow, and bis cello should be fixed by his knees not by the "sting"...
Nice pizz lmao!
??? who said anything about technique?
Boccherini was a classical composer... He lived during the time of Haydn, and has similar compositional qualities. So recordings by "Baroque" cellists would not be authentic either. What do you consider inauthentic about this interpretation?
some people say that there are only opinions and no facts in judging musical excellence of performance and composition. But if there are only opinions and no facts, than that itself is an opinion and therefore meaningless. There are facts about how well people play and write music but only those people who know music well enough to know the difference between musical facts and musical opinions know that Starker is a great player of music old and new and the purists of old music are not included
He's great....but the only problem I have with him, and other great cellists like him (especially ones that come from Slavic countries) are too rough with some of the baroque and classical music. They just don't know how to treat. He's just too heavy and sustains too much for the earlier classical style this was written for.
It's true that Starker's generation of string players tended to perform 18th-century works in a rather heavy legato style. But "rough"? Starker? Never! I heard him live fifteen or so times in my youth, and his playing was always clean and silken. He could be mannered, but his tone was always pure (if, at times, somewhat brushy). I played for him twice -- the Lalo Concerto and Schumann's "Fantasy Pieces" -- and he was a far less terrifying teacher than I had expected.
is there a reason why he doesnt recognize appoggiaturas? lol
You misunderstand me. I do not think, nor did I ever say in the you tube reviews, that one has to log x amount of years listening to and studying music, in order to appreciate music. But in order to understand it as intimately as I do, one would have to do more than just listen to it and enjoy it. One would have to study the mechanics of and history of and practices of any field including Western European indigenous (Classical) Art Music in order to "go beyond" the mere love of it.
the pretentious fool who mentioned Bylsma in the same breath as Starker needs atleast several years of severely serious musical instruction before he opens his mouth again about things musical and makes an utter fool of himself as he did.