Lucky you!

OMG lucky

@@aknightofcamelot Yup.

Wow 🥰

Dear Lord, what a concert!

ah ahAha aha h a A you know what.... i can't believe this was 1840... this is the true birth of Jazz and Rock 'n Roll ...only 100 years ahead of it's time. This, has the status of true revelation to me right now ! I just found and listened to this piece for the first time in my music life....tonight.

Recording technology was pretty advanced in 1972. Just because it's 48 years ago doesn't mean it's tinny and primitive.

@@tomfurgas2844 erea 60'-75 is the Golden age of recordings , the Top of recordings

@@alainspiteri502 Yes, high fidelity recording became the industry standard by the late 1950's. Those gorgeous Nat King Cole albums of that period are proof of that.

Sorry, but you're just wrong. Recording is so much more musical and not rushed.

@@PlayBetterJazz This isn't rushed at all

I agree with Cool JL . This performance is so exiting, so full of passion and intensity, while the studio recording some 8-9 years later is a little academic in my opinion. This 1972 live performance have also been published on a Decca LP back in 1972 “Ashkenazy in concert “. I bought it when it was quite new.

@@ulfwernernielsen6708 j'm opposite against your taste : no comparison this 1972 with the recording Decca 1979 ( published 82 ) the record London 1979 is the best sonata op35-2 with S Rachmaninov , we are very different

@@alainspiteri502 Thank you. It is always interesting to hear an opinion different from my own. It would be interesting for me to hear your opinion about the two Horowitz recordings RCA1950 and Columbia 1962 . I dislike the RCA and I love the Columbia. The Rachmaninov recording is very different from Ashkenazy but my favorite historical recordings is the Cortot 1928 and 1933 . Without any doubt he was too old when he recorded it again in 1953 . Have a nice day . Ulf Werner Nielsen .

Пожалуй, слишком настырный. И рояль так себе.

Meraviglioso!!!!

I just skip the first two movements & go straight to the Marche.

@@bezuglich I first heard Mr. Ashkenazy play when I bought the Russian LP recording of the Chopin etudes....He was about 18 years old and I was amazed by his playing.....And when I heard him play the Chopin ballads I was even more amazed by his virtuosity .....His playing has changed over the years ever since he started conducting......But he is still my favorite pianist when it comes to Chopin....with the exception of Vladimir Horowitz who has no equal, except Sergei Rachmaninoff.

@@MoebiusTripper To me, here, it sounds like he's playing Prokofiev. He also sounds like he's double-parked outside. And where is the rubato?But, for the masses - and the competition judges - the more you pound, the better you sound, right? Much more fun (and insightful) for me is to poke around the score on the bass (especially the last movement), drawing out the lines, playing them backwards, pilfering hot licks, etc.

@@bezuglich Well the Russian school of piano playing believes in "pounding" or playing loud....What do you think of Rachmaninoff playing this sonata? The last movement he plays like no one else I've heard....He has breath taking crescendos which few pianists even realize that is what is needed in this last movement in order to give the effect of the wind blowing over the grave yard....Only Andre Watts comes close to what Rachmaninoff did in this last movement.....You Tube has the recording of Rachmaninoff playing this sonata.....

@@MoebiusTripper The version I want to hear, MT, is Victor Borge's. To be honest, each of the interpreters has their little bag of tricks and performative insights, but . . . so what? The score itself (excepting the last movement) is a bore - stiff rhythmically, with predictable binary routines . . . like a silent-movie soundtrack. I.e. Romanticism, yes? And re: Rach's crescendos, they're out of place, contrived, even - it's a graveyard of pianos, not artistes, after all, isn't it? This is a piece to be played at home - no metronome, no fraidy-cat critics around, lingering over, improvising on the lines and leaving the bombast for the plumbers in the concert hall.

JP Smith His approach is probably founded more upon the "idealist" approach of Schumann who termed the 4 movements of this sonata as Chopin's 4 "colossal children" bound together... I suppose the choice of tempo is suppose to envoke the tenacity and uproar of the first movement, but it doesn't make much profite at the expense of the score itself. I agree with you on that.

Yes it sounds more Listzian than Chopin but who knows how Chopin would have played it. I suspect he would have shown off his pianistic skills in his day. I frankly prefer Chopin with 'balls'. I was at this concert and it changed my view of Chopin forever; instead of the scmaltzty approach fashionable at the time, Ashkenazy's approach was a relevation.

This is pure Chopin. I fail to understand the need for intellectualizing; that should be left to the limited world of the musicologist, who contributes nothing to the performing arts.

JP Smith, I suppose you prefer Michelangeli's yawn-inspiring tempi.

Nay Tro, I suppose you prefer a more discontinuous and moribund approach. Envoke? Profite?

Christmas song? The movement’s called funeral March

Por penaltis

i don’t think he is chewing gum... it is a involutary jaw movement when some performers are tense or under pressure.

he is not chewing gum. It is involuntary move some performer do under tension or pressure.

@@nevesferreira2396 I know I was making fun of this aspect.

Chewing gum actually helps you concentrate and be calm . Many people chew gum when playing piano. People also chew gum when playing cricket, football and basketball.

@@shah144 maybe that some people use it, but mine was a joke that seems he is chewing a gum, of course he is not, but it seems that way and is a bit annoying.

ruth talley : for me op35-2 is phenomenal great grandioso with all saoul we can imagine , the first Sonata of piano . J have listen many recordings and j agree Aschkenazy here in live is not for me the first recording of this monumental Sonata is Aschkenazy with Decca-studio for many reasons also exceptional Rachmaninov ; live is often very different of studio record : l like very well "Gaspard " by Argerich with DG 1970 so j have listened in 80' Argerich in live playing this piece : a " Gaspard " disappointed j have no recognized Argerich ; j think really that a pianist is a human no a robot and sometimes he is genious others days less good , j think this really listening Aschkenazy with two different records of thi sonata ; j'm a fan of Aschkenazy since 1958 ( chopin--studies ) but no after 1980 where it seems he played more money than music : Aschkenazy beetwen 1980-1985 recorded all the composers mozart Schumann etc before to play less for Marstro-Orchestrat here is j think about this sonata in fact here j agree with you

Two recordings op35-2 = Aschkenazy ( Decca studio ) akso Rachmaninov , Rubinstein disappointing for me

@@alainspiteri502 You are brilliant in your interpretation ! You taught me a lot.

@@ruthtalley242 we can find in little price 5he best Aschkenasy- Tchaikovsky cto ( Decca-1963 ) Beethoven cto 5 ( Decca 70' ) and sound wonderful-vinyl . For me Aschkznazy don't understand Chopin so he becomes meticulous his piano is too reflexive j don't like ballades etc .. only studies-Chopin ( 1958 ) and op35-2 studio record ; Great pianist

ruth talley j said here that j 'dont like Chopin by Aschkenasy it's the same thing for Zimmerman who is too meticulous Aschkenasy also very meticulous playing Chopin.