Probably my favorite interpretation of the G minor Rhapsody, and to think that she was only 18 or 19 years old when this was recorded. Just phenomenal.
The notes of her performance are clear and simple.If you know,the style of Brahms is very simple but deep.This is how Martha Agerich performed the song.
@@willemboone7912 It is, actually. In ancient Greek, part of the stem is (probably, I know it is disputed) that of "oide", or ode, song. So... yea, for once, someone is actually correct in referring to an instrumental piece as a song, lol.
What a charming performance, and now I'm feeling like I missed out on something culturally important for the first 60 years of my life simply because this is the first time I've heard Sra. Argerich's take on Brahms. Even as a child, I had plenty of recordings of her doing Chopin, Schumann, and most of the other notable masters of the piano but, bizarrely enough, never Brahms. The commenter just below who stated that Brahms' style is very simple yet deep hit the nail on the head, and Marta is certainly one of the best at balancing seemingly contradictory forces like that.
I'm trying to emulate Martha Agerich's interpretation of this song for a recital. Making the fast parts sound as clear and beautiful as her is not easy.
Das lyrische 2.Thema ist wunderbar wie auch der ganze Mittelteil.Die Temposchwankungen im Hauptteil kann ich nicht nachvollziehen,auch das Decrescendo im Eröffnungsgedanken: Brahms notiert eindeutig ein Crescendo.Gratulation!
Leider war VIEL zu WENIG Brahms in ihrem Repertoire.Statt der 150zigsten Version des Schumann Konzerts oder der Kinderscenenen hätte sie Brahms spielen sollen. Schade,nun wird es nichts mehr werden.Umso kostbarer solche wenigen Aufnahmen.
She played the exact opposite of what Brahms wrote in the first 8 measures. Cf. the crescendi where she plays decrescendi. And that’s because she puts too much power in measures 1-2 and 5-6.
Seductive and exciting, like a cat playfully chasing and devouring a mouse. Yet another "dark and gleeful feminine" take on this fatalistic work; perhaps the most representative, but without the corresponding authentically tragic masculinity it is difficult to achieve a definitive interpretation. At least it's fun . . . . EDIT RUclips is blocking further comments or replies I make here, so I am forced to answer the two subcomments below like this: I had tried replying to the first subcomment by Emma Zheng by asking whether one must be male in order to express masculinity. Argerich's performance is certainly valid and even representative, but not the definitive masculine interpretation which I seek. To the second subcomment by Ikoipz I had agreed that Argerich's performance is phenomenal, and that I might have been feeling sardonic or taciturn when I made my original comment after searching for many hours (and beyond that, years) for the definitive version which marries both the emotional and philosophical depth of this piece in one. The "old, authentic" expression of the work has apparently never been fully realized on tape. That said, this is likely the standard reference and will remain so for a long time. My search for the ultimate rendition may, however, be likewise near-indefinitely extended.
Talk about rude, I believe that Argerich's interpretation and performance of this piece is phenomenal. Although the "tragic masculinity" might be "authentic", new trends come, and clearly her work shows a new and better side of this piece !
@robbydyer4500 Whilst recognizing that you do praise Argerich's performance here, and without in any way doubting the honesty of your views, I have to say that what you say about your search for the definitive masculine version of this piece strikes me as a complete load of tosh. If you think that music and its performance (or elements thereof) can be reduced to such narrow concepts as masculine or feminine, then I fear your understanding of music is limited.
I dislike this performance. That beginning is not "molto passionato" at all. Her rubatto is a bit nonsensical. The repeated notes in the accompaniment are too relevant and the melody is not well conducted.
Citriano Torres je ne suis pas d'accord je trouve cette interprétation pleine de feu. Mais un feu subtil qui vient d'en bas : le feu de brahms, le magma !
聴き比べて今ここに辿り着いていますが、まるで人が話しているかのような緩急だと感じました。気難しいとされていたブラームス、このように感情が揺れ動く様がしっくりきます。その表現は本当に素晴らしいと思います。
Probably my favorite interpretation of the G minor Rhapsody, and to think that she was only 18 or 19 years old when this was recorded. Just phenomenal.
56 years ago; but still as fresh and sparkling as ever!
Not compared to Richter: ruclips.net/video/32F9PcC31OQ/видео.html
@@CLASSICALFAN100 no
Much more mystical than Richter.
My favoriten Interpretation
64 years ago...
One of the best readings of this piece!! Truly a rhapsodic story😍
The notes of her performance are clear and simple.If you know,the style of Brahms is very simple but deep.This is how Martha Agerich performed the song.
It's not a song!
@@willemboone7912 It is, actually. In ancient Greek, part of the stem is (probably, I know it is disputed) that of "oide", or ode, song. So... yea, for once, someone is actually correct in referring to an instrumental piece as a song, lol.
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Madam/Sir, this is a not song, l don’t hear the pianist’s voice…
song?
What a charming performance, and now I'm feeling like I missed out on something culturally important for the first 60 years of my life simply because this is the first time I've heard Sra. Argerich's take on Brahms. Even as a child, I had plenty of recordings of her doing Chopin, Schumann, and most of the other notable masters of the piano but, bizarrely enough, never Brahms. The commenter just below who stated that Brahms' style is very simple yet deep hit the nail on the head, and Marta is certainly one of the best at balancing seemingly contradictory forces like that.
So DEEP..! i love this interpretation!
Her music is so captivating, it's like it reaches out and grabs your soul. The passion is unreal!
Absolutely wonderful playing,
Un Brahms temperamental. Argerich capta maravillosamente los claroscuros de la obra, tanto en su fuerza como en su gran dulzura. Me gusta
Tellement beau et profond ! 0:33
Wunderschoene Interpretation!
Very convincingly played… she understands the composition (who am l to say such a thing….).
The only time I ever liked this piece due to a revelatory performance by Miss Agerich. BRAVA!
I'm trying to emulate Martha Agerich's interpretation of this song for a recital. Making the fast parts sound as clear and beautiful as her is not easy.
Schumann loved this music
maybe...but Ican't stand how:Schumann died in 1856 and Brahms wrote the piece in1879...I would say that Schumann would have appreciate it..
this man is underrated and a half
Ga jij nou maar lekker brawl stars spelen en kroketten eten...
@@martenjonkers4216 croquettes are fire fym
This piece reminds me of Beethoven’s Op. 57 Appassionata…dark, haunting, subconcious, surging, soaring, volcanic…
Wtf this recording is 65 years old ... That is just unfathomable
Ich liebe es
The very best interpretation l have heard of this strong energetic Brahms creation.
I am learning this piece and this is the interpretation I am trying to emulate. Full of expression, quite excellent.
That piece is so difficult I'm working on it, wish me good luck hahah
Me to I'm working on it, good Luck to You !
Sehr schön ^^
Super interpretazione
Try Richter instead: ruclips.net/video/32F9PcC31OQ/видео.html
“She was born to play the piano”, l am quoting this from somewhere.
She's such a beautiful young woman here.
Gran p8anista muy joven en aquel entontonses. Mi Rapsodhia favorita. 🇮🇷🫣
So exellent!!!
Nope, nope and **NOPE**! "Stuck-up Martha" is goofy compared to Richter:
ruclips.net/video/32F9PcC31OQ/видео.html
Brahms para siempre
trop bon
この曲はハードでリチャード先生の並べてくださった方を見ても女性ではアルゲリッチしかありません。ドレミさんがラプソディー第一番よりは易しいだろうとおっしゃったので、私も聴いて楽譜を見ました。
brava bravura BRAVISIMMO Brahms
Das lyrische 2.Thema ist wunderbar wie auch der ganze Mittelteil.Die Temposchwankungen
im Hauptteil kann ich nicht nachvollziehen,auch das Decrescendo im Eröffnungsgedanken:
Brahms notiert eindeutig ein Crescendo.Gratulation!
Martha vous êtes une virtuose .
Leider war VIEL zu WENIG Brahms in ihrem Repertoire.Statt der 150zigsten Version des Schumann Konzerts oder der Kinderscenenen hätte sie Brahms spielen sollen. Schade,nun wird es nichts mehr werden.Umso kostbarer solche wenigen Aufnahmen.
+rabinovitch1 Oder noch kürzer gesagt "So muss das Stück gespielt werden" :-)
She played the exact opposite of what Brahms wrote in the first 8 measures. Cf. the crescendi where she plays decrescendi. And that’s because she puts too much power in measures 1-2 and 5-6.
4:45
🤩
Frei aber einsam.....
Seductive and exciting, like a cat playfully chasing and devouring a mouse. Yet another "dark and gleeful feminine" take on this fatalistic work; perhaps the most representative, but without the corresponding authentically tragic masculinity it is difficult to achieve a definitive interpretation. At least it's fun . . . .
EDIT
RUclips is blocking further comments or replies I make here, so I am forced to answer the two subcomments below like this:
I had tried replying to the first subcomment by Emma Zheng by asking whether one must be male in order to express masculinity. Argerich's performance is certainly valid and even representative, but not the definitive masculine interpretation which I seek.
To the second subcomment by Ikoipz I had agreed that Argerich's performance is phenomenal, and that I might have been feeling sardonic or taciturn when I made my original comment after searching for many hours (and beyond that, years) for the definitive version which marries both the emotional and philosophical depth of this piece in one. The "old, authentic" expression of the work has apparently never been fully realized on tape.
That said, this is likely the standard reference and will remain so for a long time. My search for the ultimate rendition may, however, be likewise near-indefinitely extended.
So from what I deduct from your interpretation, however much possible, is that Argerich's performance isn't valid, because she's not a man?
Talk about rude, I believe that Argerich's interpretation and performance of this piece is phenomenal. Although the "tragic masculinity" might be "authentic", new trends come, and clearly her work shows a new and better side of this piece !
"Dark and gleeful feminine"? Oh, for Pete's sake.
I really like Perahya's interpretation, you should check it out
@robbydyer4500 Whilst recognizing that you do praise Argerich's performance here, and without in any way doubting the honesty of your views, I have to say that what you say about your search for the definitive masculine version of this piece strikes me as a complete load of tosh. If you think that music and its performance (or elements thereof) can be reduced to such narrow concepts as masculine or feminine, then I fear your understanding of music is limited.
Immensa
MUS ICA SINFONICA ESPAÑOLA
Música alemã!
😅😅😅
😂
謝昀蓁 😒
謝昀蓁ワルツ１５番ブラームス
ワルツ15番ブラームス
c
Pas mal
I dislike this performance. That beginning is not "molto passionato" at all. Her rubatto is a bit nonsensical. The repeated notes in the accompaniment are too relevant and the melody is not well conducted.
lol, classic plebs
Citriano Torres je ne suis pas d'accord je trouve cette interprétation pleine de feu. Mais un feu subtil qui vient d'en bas : le feu de brahms, le magma !
meine worte digger
No.She is a master and this is a recital so she could play the style she want and so this is a good recording.
I hope that you are able to perform it in a better way!