This Shostakovich concerto is astonishing. I've played some part of it (the slow movement!). It's tonal music, but uses the full color of the 12 tones. I'll take this over truly atonal music, any day of the week!
Yes, it is as you say. But for me, the second movement (the scherzo) has always been an absolute favourite. It just blows my mind. Every time. By the way, Kogan plays Shostakovich just the way I like it - very clear and sharp as steel.
This is probably one of my favorite pieces of music. The third movement is one of the most sorrowful things I've ever heard, then it moves into something entirely frightening in the fourth.
There were many critics at that concert. Even to the point where a women came up to him and said "the sound of your Stradivarius was amazing". All i know is that it is a recital where during that time his 2 instruments were with his luthier. If it was an Orchestra then of course he would cancel the performance.
It doesn't take great expertise to realize what a great violinist Kogan was. It is just the culture of classical music that is fading. When this happens, you might see as Americans as uneducated. However this is the case in the rest of the world. Classical music has been dying for a very long time.
I don't know what a 5-dollar violin quality is like, during that time. Another occassion where Mr.Heifetz once again played on a crap fiddle with his student quartet. No one noticed until he stopped the performance abrubtly and broke the violin across his knees. No one knew until then he was playing on a 5 dollar violin
I see I see. I was assuming you were referring to the masters in that case. Yes the tools make things easier to a certain extent. To the average joe violinists yes the instruments make a huge part. I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Like i said. No one in the audience could tell if Heifetz was playing on his Guarneri or a 5-dollar violin. So in that case instrument and quality is irrelevant. If you are asserting that the instrument deals a lot with quality in playing in ALL cases then i would disagree with you. If you mean most cases then yes i would agree to a certain extent.
I don't think there is anything wrong with his performance of this movement, which has the least room of all four for individual interpretation by the violinist. This movement relies far more on technique than musical sensibility, and Vengerov's technique is simply phenomenal.
each person is very different from another, the same for countries...not all countries are the same, not all people feel the same way, there are somethings that happened in some countries that made the people be what they are, thats personalty (of a person, of a country etc) im sure that there are excelent musicians in usa, in mexico, in chile, wherever you want, but russians are unique (like all off course), well this is so subjective, lets enjoy music...and beers
Note: this is not my account, I am just using it to comment. Response: It feels like a stone to my heart when people say this about Kogan and Oistrakh. Yes, russian culture is wonderful and unique and there are innumerous great poets in Russia (were), absolutely phenomenal composers, e.t.c. But, when it comes to violin playing, the huge majority of these great violinists were JEWS. Before you say that you are attributing the country I would like to point out that the culture they grew up in was also Jewish-Russian, and at the very least we can say Jewish-Russian. Why is it that all great African-American artists are called such (which is correct by the way) and with jews everybody just hides this? Unfortunately I am aware (and expectant) that this comment will be met with cold-hearted argument.. (not from OP who seems to be a nice guy, but from other individuals)
I did not feel the need to make an emphasis on the art mastery in case of somebody like Kogan. Guys like him are gods of the violin, who am I to even start talking about their mastery let alone emphasize something here? I just skipped this bit. Someone here was wondering how Kogan was getting away with smashing the strings with his bow. All I meant to say was that it's not JUST mastery, you can get away with a lot if you have the right tools.
"It" means quality of playing, what the hell else are we talking about here? And good instrument (yes it's just a tool, nobody says it plays by itself) is a necessary component of the "IT". Btw, I'm still waiting for the answer to my question as to why all the Great violinists played on Guarneris and Tourtes?
I don't know his sentiments exactly. The 5-dollar violin was in pretty bad shape based off of the records during that time too. Mr.Heifetz is a very unpredictable violinist yet alone as a person, Maybe he was going for it just to test the audience or just for the heck of it, I don't know.
Where did you get this anecdote from? I've not heard this one and I should have by now. What was the concert? who were the audience? for purity of the experiment one should play on both Guarneri and the 5-dollar one after another. I'm sure Heifetz could hypnotize the audience with a cheap fiddle, but when you play with the orchestra and you need to project and overpower the whole band playing say double forte...it's just not possible.
"It is mostly from quality of instruments" and "quality of instruments (violin AND bow) has a lot to do with it" sounds awfuly the same to me especially "a lot to do with it" if not in that terms what do you mean by "it"?
Oh well, those women...I guess that's possible, still I would love to know more. It's always the details that are interesting in such cases. Like what the critics would have to say off the record, and exactly what the fiddle was like, there are 5-dollars and there are 5-dollars. I doubt that Heifetz would lower himself by playing on total rubbish.
Ive seen Vengerov perfom this concerto live twice and once you see him in person. He is without doubt one of the greatest violinists of all time and possibly the best interpreter of this concerto... It's not just the technique, but the absolute power of his musicality and understanding of the concerto's meaning. Also because most of the performances including recordings were done with Rostropovich, its not hard to say its authoratative.
How come so many people have so little respect for "showmen" like Vengerov when some of the most respected names in violin history are "showmen." Think Paganini.
His compositions are beautiful and likely reflected beauty in his playing, but I wouldn’t know. It was said that Ernst and Lipinski played much more musically than Paganini, yet their compositions are closer to being forgotten than pag’s. Vengerov on the other hand… no compositions and only a claim to being a violinist, he has no claim to being a misician…
"putting Words"?! I am just quoting of what you exactly said. You may not think that everyone thinks that you are implying that quality of instruments deals a lot with mastery and saying mastery is irrelevant in making a great player but i am well sure everyone else thinks you are.
Guarneris and Tourtes is easier for the violinist to express his/her individuality, unless in the hands of the master there are only "subtle" differences that even without it wouldn't hurt the quality
Recent research (allbeit flawed) has confirmed that indeed listeners cannot tell the difference between a modern instrument and a Strad. From personal experience I can tell you that a wonderful violin does not produce sound on its own - in the beginnig it may sound a lot worse than a modern instrument. However after adapting to it in a very partiular way one can open up its POTENTIAL. This is why the great masters used great violins. They had so much sound they needed a greater cap. There is timbre present in great violins - that is true, however timbre is but a part of sound, and by far not the most significant part (as evidenced by old recordings with timbre almost gone, yet wonderful sound)
The instruments in itself is nothing but a tool to make the player's job easier to demonstrate their mastery. Basically your saying mastery is irrelevant in general and as long as you can play the right notes and rhythmn you are a "master". It is nothing but a farce that it is the instrument that dictates whether you are a master or not.
And why the hell all these great players spent the money on Guarneris and Tourtes if according to you it matters not? With all their mastery why couldn't they just play on any fiddle and with any bow?
Very well then "quality of instruments (violin AND bow) has a lot to do with it", it is still the same thing. You should know that there are not so great players who played on a strad or Guarneri.
"Got to be able to play" is another example that you lack emphasis on the art mastery. You probably said it the wrong way that everyone else is misunderstanding you i hope. And i assure you i am not the only one whether you agree or not
With Mr.Heifetz or Mr.Kogan playing a piece of junk does not make his playing a piece of junk either. It is all in the player whether you want to admit it or not.
It may seem crap to you but there are players who sound like they are scratching on the Guarneri or Strad. Whether you want to argue or not it is all mastery. For example Mr.Heifetz played on a 5 dollar violin and no-one even noticed. Therefore it is not just the instrument or bow...you have to realize what i am trying to say from my metaphor. You are taking it too literally. It is your logic that is idiotic. "It is mostly from quality of instruments"...Bull$#$%
Oh baby, (and all the others who commented on this story: before you send us your "expertise" Just fyi - the anecdote with the 5 Dollar crap is not about Heifetz, it was Fritz Kreisler, who was fed up with peolpe who attributed his sweet sound to his Strad. Ant the other part is really about Heifetz, who, whe a stupd woman attributed his sound to the violin. He opened the case, listened and then said: "strange - I don't hear anytheing"
well...Heifetz is Heifetz of course. Still I would like to see that 5-dollar violin. I know from my little personal experience how frustrating and disheartening it can be - playing a crap fiddle, have to do it too often myself while teaching. Believe me, it's a torture. It's like you're made to make love to an ugly woman. Yak.
Thats a load of %$%. I've heard players play on Guarneris and Strads even Tourtes for a bow and it sounded awful. In that case i might as well have a 3 year old play on a strad and call him a master
Really? You've heard crap players "play on Guarneris and Strads even Tourtes"? THAT sounds @*&^ to me. By the way, I did not say that mastery does not matter, that your line about a 3 year old is idiotic.
Greatest violinist ever.
Совершенно удивительная феерия , подчинённая единой трактовке - это мог себе позволить только гений Когана !!!
This Shostakovich concerto is astonishing. I've played some part of it (the slow movement!). It's tonal music, but uses the full color of the 12 tones. I'll take this over truly atonal music, any day of the week!
This is the scariest version of this piece I've heard so far. Yes, that's a good thing!
Yes, it is as you say. But for me, the second movement (the scherzo) has always been an absolute favourite. It just blows my mind. Every time.
By the way, Kogan plays Shostakovich just the way I like it - very clear and sharp as steel.
This is probably one of my favorite pieces of music. The third movement is one of the most sorrowful things I've ever heard, then it moves into something entirely frightening in the fourth.
I am happy you are surrounded by people with such great expertise in violin playing. You should be feeling blessed to be part of that community.
this is one of my favorite videos on youtube, thanks for posting it
Потрясающий!!! Великий!!
I'ts a part of the Cadenza and the 4th movement (Allegro Con Brio) from Shostakovich's Violin Concerto.
Wow. Leonid was 'ON' !! Great video.
There were many critics at that concert. Even to the point where a women came up to him and said "the sound of your Stradivarius was amazing". All i know is that it is a recital where during that time his 2 instruments were with his luthier. If it was an Orchestra then of course he would cancel the performance.
To think that he was the violin teacher of an old teacher of mine :-)
Da best ever!
It doesn't take great expertise to realize what a great violinist Kogan was. It is just the culture of classical music that is fading. When this happens, you might see as Americans as uneducated. However this is the case in the rest of the world. Classical music has been dying for a very long time.
The quintessence of Moscow methodology.
Браво блестяще сыграл
I don't know what a 5-dollar violin quality is like, during that time. Another occassion where Mr.Heifetz once again played on a crap fiddle with his student quartet. No one noticed until he stopped the performance abrubtly and broke the violin across his knees. No one knew until then he was playing on a 5 dollar violin
I dont know ho's face scares me most: Kogan's or Oïstrakh's (at playing, otherwise he's quite friendly). Both are magnificent, dough.
I believe in my opinion that Kogan really nailed Shostakovich concerto in a positive way.
true
WOWWWW
That was so exciting
hey hungwildparti , isaac stern died september 22 2001 so its impoosible for you to hear about his death the same morning of 9 11
kogan is incredible
I don't know which American's you know, but Kogan is a well known historical figure with many I know.
Totally agree!!!
I see I see. I was assuming you were referring to the masters in that case. Yes the tools make things easier to a certain extent. To the average joe violinists yes the instruments make a huge part. I apologize for the misunderstanding.
Even a master painter can't express himself truly with just a hair
3:57, I think you mean. No matter, the intensity throughout is awesome!
Like i said. No one in the audience could tell if Heifetz was playing on his Guarneri or a 5-dollar violin. So in that case instrument and quality is irrelevant. If you are asserting that the instrument deals a lot with quality in playing in ALL cases then i would disagree with you. If you mean most cases then yes i would agree to a certain extent.
I don't think there is anything wrong with his performance of this movement, which has the least room of all four for individual interpretation by the violinist. This movement relies far more on technique than musical sensibility, and Vengerov's technique is simply phenomenal.
@flowforms Exactly. Besides, I have the recording of this on CD and it's the same speed. People can play even faster than this too.
SamLee0519 i'm from the Russian school. Specifically David Oistrakh. ; )
That SOUND how does he do it?????
very true
wooowww
@kzm1, yeah, he was serious all right. He didn't make grimaces like Vengerov does, and didn't ever look as if he was smelling shit while playing.
Oh I think so many of these so called youngster "musicians" could learn so much from this man (and others of his ilk).
To learn one must listen
each person is very different from another, the same for countries...not all countries are the same, not all people feel the same way, there are somethings that happened in some countries that made the people be what they are, thats personalty (of a person, of a country etc) im sure that there are excelent musicians in usa, in mexico, in chile, wherever you want, but russians are unique (like all off course), well this is so subjective, lets enjoy music...and beers
Note: this is not my account, I am just using it to comment. Response: It feels like a stone to my heart when people say this about Kogan and Oistrakh. Yes, russian culture is wonderful and unique and there are innumerous great poets in Russia (were), absolutely phenomenal composers, e.t.c. But, when it comes to violin playing, the huge majority of these great violinists were JEWS. Before you say that you are attributing the country I would like to point out that the culture they grew up in was also Jewish-Russian, and at the very least we can say Jewish-Russian. Why is it that all great African-American artists are called such (which is correct by the way) and with jews everybody just hides this? Unfortunately I am aware (and expectant) that this comment will be met with cold-hearted argument.. (not from OP who seems to be a nice guy, but from other individuals)
ditto!!! where's the rest?!
So... fucking... GOOD.
I did not feel the need to make an emphasis on the art mastery in case of somebody like Kogan. Guys like him are gods of the violin, who am I to even start talking about their mastery let alone emphasize something here? I just skipped this bit. Someone here was wondering how Kogan was getting away with smashing the strings with his bow. All I meant to say was that it's not JUST mastery, you can get away with a lot if you have the right tools.
upbows: i was asking myself the same thing watching the passacaglia two minutes ago. it's uncanny.
"It" means quality of playing, what the hell else are we talking about here? And good instrument (yes it's just a tool, nobody says it plays by itself) is a necessary component of the "IT". Btw, I'm still waiting for the answer to my question as to why all the Great violinists played on Guarneris and Tourtes?
I don't know his sentiments exactly. The 5-dollar violin was in pretty bad shape based off of the records during that time too. Mr.Heifetz is a very unpredictable violinist yet alone as a person, Maybe he was going for it just to test the audience or just for the heck of it, I don't know.
Where did you get this anecdote from? I've not heard this one and I should have by now. What was the concert? who were the audience? for purity of the experiment one should play on both Guarneri and the 5-dollar one after another. I'm sure Heifetz could hypnotize the audience with a cheap fiddle, but when you play with the orchestra and you need to project and overpower the whole band playing say double forte...it's just not possible.
Well, it looks very nervous. Surprising from Kogan
"It is mostly from quality of instruments" and "quality of instruments (violin AND bow) has a lot to do with it" sounds awfuly the same to me especially "a lot to do with it" if not in that terms what do you mean by "it"?
Oh well, those women...I guess that's possible, still I would love to know more. It's always the details that are interesting in such cases. Like what the critics would have to say off the record, and exactly what the fiddle was like, there are 5-dollars and there are 5-dollars. I doubt that Heifetz would lower himself by playing on total rubbish.
@TooMansuetude Tell me, what leads you to believe it is sped up?
Perhaps Hungwildparti only heard of 9 11 on 9 22?
@kzm1
Absolutely truly
Ive seen Vengerov perfom this concerto live twice and once you see him in person. He is without doubt one of the greatest violinists of all time and possibly the best interpreter of this concerto... It's not just the technique, but the absolute power of his musicality and understanding of the concerto's meaning. Also because most of the performances including recordings were done with Rostropovich, its not hard to say its authoratative.
is there no full version of this cadenza on video? : (
@kzm1 you spelled serious wrong.
kogan is incredible! too bad not many americans know about him
Wait, what happened to the first 9/10ths of the Cadenza?!?
How come so many people have so little respect for "showmen" like Vengerov when some of the most respected names in violin history are "showmen." Think Paganini.
His compositions are beautiful and likely reflected beauty in his playing, but I wouldn’t know. It was said that Ernst and Lipinski played much more musically than Paganini, yet their compositions are closer to being forgotten than pag’s. Vengerov on the other hand… no compositions and only a claim to being a violinist, he has no claim to being a misician…
Where's the beginning of this??
"putting Words"?! I am just quoting of what you exactly said. You may not think that everyone thinks that you are implying that quality of instruments deals a lot with mastery and saying mastery is irrelevant in making a great player but i am well sure everyone else thinks you are.
OK. Could you name them?
from all thebest i whant an apenian who is better hifets or kogan
Guarneris and Tourtes is easier for the violinist to express his/her individuality, unless in the hands of the master there are only "subtle" differences that even without it wouldn't hurt the quality
he is the only perfect Paganini concerto player ever..
i think heifetz and kogan are very close but i'LL GIVE the edge to heifetz but not much
quality of instruments (violin AND bow) has a lot to do with it. don't listen to those who say that it's just mastery.
Recent research (allbeit flawed) has confirmed that indeed listeners cannot tell the difference between a modern instrument and a Strad. From personal experience I can tell you that a wonderful violin does not produce sound on its own - in the beginnig it may sound a lot worse than a modern instrument. However after adapting to it in a very partiular way one can open up its POTENTIAL. This is why the great masters used great violins. They had so much sound they needed a greater cap. There is timbre present in great violins - that is true, however timbre is but a part of sound, and by far not the most significant part (as evidenced by old recordings with timbre almost gone, yet wonderful sound)
What? No, It is NOT the same thing! You have misinterpreted my very first post and got yourself all worked up here.
"It is mostly from quality of instruments"-who are you quoting here? I never said anything like that. Learn to read.
The instruments in itself is nothing but a tool to make the player's job easier to demonstrate their mastery. Basically your saying mastery is irrelevant in general and as long as you can play the right notes and rhythmn you are a "master". It is nothing but a farce that it is the instrument that dictates whether you are a master or not.
Kondrachine for me^^
And why the hell all these great players spent the money on Guarneris and Tourtes if according to you it matters not? With all their mastery why couldn't they just play on any fiddle and with any bow?
Yes, the cameraman could have been a bit more imagineative
Very well then "quality of instruments (violin AND bow) has a lot to do with it", it is still the same thing. You should know that there are not so great players who played on a strad or Guarneri.
great player. the russian school produces the best players...; )
sorry, just playing favorites... lol
"Got to be able to play" is another example that you lack emphasis on the art mastery. You probably said it the wrong way that everyone else is misunderstanding you i hope. And i assure you i am not the only one whether you agree or not
So they did not realize that it was a cheap one till he broke it? it's quite funny
@ILoveElena864 No it isn't.
With Mr.Heifetz or Mr.Kogan playing a piece of junk does not make his playing a piece of junk either. It is all in the player whether you want to admit it or not.
yea i guess if he lives under a rock
lol
The only bad thing is his facial expression
He seems thinking how to kill himself all the time AHAHAHA
It may seem crap to you but there are players who sound like they are scratching on the Guarneri or Strad. Whether you want to argue or not it is all mastery. For example Mr.Heifetz played on a 5 dollar violin and no-one even noticed. Therefore it is not just the instrument or bow...you have to realize what i am trying to say from my metaphor. You are taking it too literally. It is your logic that is idiotic. "It is mostly from quality of instruments"...Bull$#$%
Oh baby, (and all the others who commented on this story: before you send us your "expertise"
Just fyi - the anecdote with the 5 Dollar crap is not about Heifetz, it was Fritz Kreisler, who was fed up with peolpe who attributed his sweet sound to his Strad. Ant the other part is really about Heifetz, who, whe a stupd woman attributed his sound to the violin. He opened the case, listened and then said: "strange - I don't hear anytheing"
well...Heifetz is Heifetz of course. Still I would like to see that 5-dollar violin. I know from my little personal experience how frustrating and disheartening it can be - playing a crap fiddle, have to do it too often myself while teaching. Believe me, it's a torture. It's like you're made to make love to an ugly woman. Yak.
Great playing, poor camera work. Enough of his face, already- how about his hands, bow, violin...
Thats a load of %$%. I've heard players play on Guarneris and Strads even Tourtes for a bow and it sounded awful. In that case i might as well have a 3 year old play on a strad and call him a master
Really? You've heard crap players "play on Guarneris and Strads even Tourtes"? THAT sounds @*&^ to me. By the way, I did not say that mastery does not matter, that your line about a 3 year old is idiotic.